Abstract
Intercountry adoption—meant to serve as a humanitarian mechanism to provide homes for children without families—has, over decades, been marred by systemic abuse, facilitating some of the most egregious forms of child trafficking. Despite the noble intent embedded in instruments like the Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption (1993) and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989), endemic issues such as falsification of documents, profit-driven intermediaries, and weak enforcement mechanisms have compromised global adoption systems.
This research critically examines the nexus between intercountry adoption and child trafficking, analyzing the legal, social, and institutional factors that enable such exploitation. It further evaluates international legal frameworks, explores the evolving challenges faced by sending and receiving countries, and provides detailed recommendations for strengthening global cooperation mechanisms. By emphasizing accountability, transparency, and intergovernmental coordination, the paper aims to propose a more ethically sound and child-centered adoption framework to prevent trafficking under the guise of adoption.
Introduction
Intercountry adoption occupies a paradoxical position in global child welfare policy: it simultaneously represents compassion and exploitation. Originating as a post-war humanitarian effort to place orphaned children in stable homes, intercountry adoption has evolved into a complex socio-legal institution often entangled with economic motives and geopolitical inequalities.
Developed nations such as:
- United States
- France
- Sweden
have historically been major “receiving countries,” while nations in:
- Africa
- Latin America
- Southeast Asia
have functioned as “sending countries.” While many adoptions genuinely secure family environments for children, mounting evidence demonstrates that others amount to buying and selling minors for profit, effectively constituting child trafficking.[1]
Overlap Between Adoption and Trafficking
The overlap between adoption and trafficking stems largely from:
- Demand-supply asymmetries
- Weak law enforcement in source countries
- The commodification of children in international markets
Unethical agencies and corrupt officials exploit legal loopholes and parental ignorance, often fabricating orphan status or coercing biological parents into relinquishment. The persistence of such abuse underscores a serious failure in global governance, raising urgent questions about existing treaties and international cooperation protocols.
The central thesis of this paper is that although legal instruments such as the Hague Convention and the CRC provide sound normative guidance, their implementation remains fragmented, necessitating stronger international coordination, monitoring, and accountability frameworks.
Review of Literature
Academic and legal scholarship on intercountry adoption and trafficking reveals extensive debate surrounding the legitimacy of current international systems. The Valparaiso University Law Review argues that intercountry adoption has, in many contexts, institutionalized the commodification of children by allowing market forces to determine outcomes, thus turning adoption into a legitimized form of child selling.
Child Commodification and Structural Failures
This framework of “child commodification” highlights the structural failures of adoption laws that indirectly sanction financial transactions under the veil of “service fees” and “expedite costs.”
Critical Development Perspective
In a more contemporary analysis, global scholars have emphasized the importance of a critical development perspective, arguing that intercountry adoption perpetuates neocolonial hierarchies between rich and poor nations. International adoptions often occur from Global South to Global North, reflecting structural inequalities that render children from developing nations more vulnerable.
United Nations Human Rights Council Concerns
Similar concerns have been voiced by the United Nations Human Rights Council, which warns that illegal intercountry adoptions may constitute serious violations of international law, including child trafficking and, under certain conditions, crimes against humanity. The UN calls for urgent state action and emphasizes that adoptees’ right to identity and origin must be upheld through transparent recordkeeping and retrieval systems.[2]
Hague Convention Safeguards
Further, the Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption (1993) established vital safeguards intended to ensure that adoption is conducted in the best interests of the child. It requires cooperation among contracting states to prevent the abduction, sale, or trafficking of children and mandates that adoption be a last resort after exhausting all in-country alternatives.
| Region | Compliance with Hague Convention | Challenges Identified |
|---|---|---|
| Africa | Low to Moderate | Lack of administrative capacity; weak law enforcement |
| Asia | Low | Corruption, limited oversight, poor coordination |
| Europe | High | Occasional delays in cross-border cooperation |
Yet, the literature reveals that compliance remains uneven. Many countries, especially in Africa and Asia, lack sufficient administrative capacity to investigate adoption intermediaries or to enforce the Hague’s provisions.[3]
Manufactured Orphans and Case Studies
Empirical studies also expose recurring scandals of “manufactured orphans,” where agencies falsify abandonment records or procure children through coercion and deception. For instance, during the early 2000s, Cambodia faced a notorious trafficking crisis in which infants were bought or stolen from poor families and laundered through fraudulent documentation networks for adoption abroad, prompting an adoption moratorium.[4]
Recommendations and Policy Implications
As a result, the literature calls for a multi-level strategy combining:
- International law reform
- Interagency cooperation
- Robust domestic oversight
While the CRC and Hague Convention provide normative baselines, their enforcement depends heavily on:
- State-level political will
- Integrity of adoption authorities
- Transparency of adoption channels
Scholars have urged for:
- Global registries of legitimate adoption agencies
- Automatic data-sharing systems among national authorities
- Cross-border investigation units to curb exploitation
[5][6]
International Legal Framework and Governance Mechanisms
The legal infrastructure governing intercountry adoption derives primarily from three international instruments: the Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989), the Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption (1993), and various regional agreements under the UN and International Social Service network.
Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)
The CRC enshrines the principle that adoption must serve the best interests of the child (Article 21). It obliges states to establish proper safeguards and monitoring authorities to ensure that adoption does not result in child trafficking or exploitation. Articles 7 and 8 further guarantee children the right to identity, including nationality, name, and family relations, emphasizing the importance of transparent documentation and post-adoption access to records.
Hague Adoption Convention (1993)
The Hague Adoption Convention operationalizes the CRC’s principles by establishing a cooperative framework where each member state designates a Central Authority responsible for managing adoption processes, verifying consent, ensuring the child’s adoptability, and liaising with other countries. Its primary objectives include preventing the abduction, sale, or trafficking of children and ensuring mutual recognition of adoptions between contracting states.
Implementation Challenges
Despite these provisions, enforcement mechanisms remain largely decentralized. The Toolkit for Preventing and Addressing Illicit Practices in Intercountry Adoption highlights:
- Gaps in inter-country communication
- Lack of systematic vetting
- Limited authority to sanction non-compliant agencies
- Corruption and weak child protection systems
- Administrative opacity, especially in sending states
The UN’s 2022 statement on illegal intercountry adoptions cautioned that without genuine compliance with international human rights standards, adoption might devolve into institutionalized trafficking. Thus, the current framework requires revision not in normative content but in its operationalization: mechanisms for transnational investigation, judicial cooperation, and victim restitution need urgent strengthening.
Systemic Challenges and Risk Factors
Understanding why trafficking persists in intercountry adoption requires exploring the systemic vulnerabilities embedded in the current global system.
| Challenge | Description |
|---|---|
| Economic Asymmetry | Economic disparities between receiving and sending countries incentivize profit-driven intermediaries. Poverty—rather than orphanhood—often drives relinquishment, enabling document fabrication to falsely declare children “abandoned.” |
| Weak Regulatory Capacity | Lack of centralized registries, forensic verification mechanisms, and trained social workers in sending countries allows traffickers to exploit loopholes through falsified or coerced consents. |
| Cultural and Institutional Biases | The “rescue” narrative tied to Western adoption, often rooted in colonial ideology, obscures the structural violence underlying child displacement and commodification. |
| Jurisdictional Fragmentation | Differing due process standards, privacy laws, and investigative powers impede cohesive cross-border prosecution, shielding transnational traffickers. |
| Post-Adoption Monitoring | Oversight frequently ends once the child leaves the sending country. Missing post-adoption reports and weak consular follow-up allow violations to remain undetected. |
The convergence of these factors transforms intercountry adoption from a humanitarian remedy into a conduit for trafficking, necessitating comprehensive reform.
The Role of International Cooperation
Effective prevention of child trafficking through adoption cannot rely on national reforms alone—it demands transnational collaboration. The Hague Convention’s cooperative structure, while conceptually strong, must evolve into a more integrated global enforcement network.
Axes of Cooperation
International cooperation operates along three primary axes:
- Legal Cooperation: Harmonization of adoption laws and reciprocity agreements to facilitate cross-border investigations, extradition, and data sharing.
- Institutional Cooperation: Information exchange, interagency coordination, and technical assistance through bodies such as the International Social Service (ISS), UNICEF, and INTERPOL.
- Policy Cooperation: Standard-setting, diplomatic accountability, and resource mobilization.
Cooperation Between Central Authorities
Cooperation between Central Authorities is critical, yet implementation remains uneven. Developed receiving countries often possess sophisticated adoption agencies and social services, while developing sending countries face resource constraints and bureaucratic inefficiency.
Joint capacity-building initiatives—such as training programs for adoption officers, creation of bilateral monitoring committees, and funding of adoption registries—have shown promise but remain limited in coverage.
Enhancing Global Enforcement
UN experts stress that cooperation must transcend formal ratification of instruments. States must:
- Actively share intelligence on offenders
- Coordinate investigations into illegal intermediaries
- Engage in joint judicial proceedings
Multi-country databases like the proposed Global Adoption Integrity Platform (GAIP) could centralize identification data, case status, and agency accreditation to prevent repetition of fraud across jurisdictions.
Ethical and Socio-Cultural Dimensions
Beyond the legal framework, intercountry adoption raises deep ethical and identity-based questions. Adoption, in its ideal form, is meant to provide stability and love. However, when facilitated through coercion or deception, it inflicts lifelong trauma. Many adoptees later discover falsified narratives about their origins, leading to identity crises and mistrust toward institutions involved in their adoption.
Ethical Considerations in Intercountry Adoption
Ethically, the act of transferring a child across national and cultural boundaries must balance two competing interests:
- The need for family placement.
- The child’s right to cultural continuity.
The subsidiarity principle, enshrined in the Hague Convention, articulates that intercountry adoption should occur only when in-country solutions such as kinship care or domestic adoption are unavailable. However, market pressures and humanitarian discourse often override this principle.
Sociological Perspectives and Global Inequality
From a sociological perspective, adoption trafficking reflects deeper imbalances in global care economies. Children from economically disadvantaged communities are systematically exported to wealthier nations, creating a one-directional flow of care that reproduces global inequality.
Need for Ethical and Institutional Reform
Thus, ethical reform must accompany institutional reform. Programs that prioritize:
- Family preservation,
- Community-based support for vulnerable parents, and
- Post-adoption identity restoration mechanisms
are necessary to humanize the adoption process and prevent the erasure of origin.
Case Studies: Lessons from Global Practices
An analysis of national experiences underscores the complexities of intercountry adoption and trafficking.
| Country | Year / Measure | Key Issues and Outcomes |
|---|---|---|
| Cambodia | 2001 Moratorium |
|
| Ethiopia | 2018 Ban |
|
| Guatemala | 2008 Transition |
|
| India | Post-Hague Convention Reforms |
|
Global Lessons and Integrated Approach
Collectively, these cases reveal that national-level bans or reforms must integrate into broader schemes of international supervision and resource-sharing to sustain results.
Policy Gaps and Institutional Deficiencies
Despite regulatory progress, critical policy gaps continue to undermine anti-trafficking efforts in intercountry adoption.
1. Fragmented Data Systems
The absence of interoperable databases across countries allows traffickers to exploit “paper gaps.” No global adoption registry currently consolidates verified data on agencies, intermediaries, or children’s status.
2. Jurisdictional Disparity
Conflicting legal interpretations of trafficking versus irregular adoption persist. Some nations treat illegal adoption as administrative misconduct, while others classify it as a criminal offense, complicating prosecution and extradition.
3. Inadequate Enforcement
Few prosecutions occur despite evidence of forged documentation and illicit payments. Regulatory capture by adoption agencies, political patronage, and the financial allure of adoption tourism perpetuate impunity.
4. Lack of Survivor-Centered Justice
Adoptees and birth parents seeking redress remain marginalized. Mechanisms for restitution, truth recovery, or nationality restoration are rare, perpetuating generational injustice.
5. Limited Funding
Post-adoption monitoring suffers from insufficient funding. Social workers in both sending and receiving states face overwhelming caseloads, leading to neglect of post-placement evaluations.
Thus, legal instruments must be supplemented with institutional innovations to enable real-time cooperation, consistent definitions, and survivor inclusion.
Recommendations and Mechanisms for Stricter International Cooperation
Addressing intercountry adoption-related trafficking requires a multifaceted approach that blends legal, institutional, technological, and ethical dimensions.
| Recommendation | Description |
|---|---|
| Creation of a Global Adoption Integrity System (GAIS) | A UN-led digital platform integrating national Central Authorities, adoption agencies, and child protection units to enable real-time verification of adoption status, agency accreditation, and child identity documentation. |
| Establishment of International Oversight and Audit Committees | Independent global panels of child rights experts should periodically review adoption practices to ensure conformity with Hague and CRC principles, with authority to recommend sanctions against non-compliant states or agencies. |
| Strengthening Bilateral and Regional Cooperation | Regional agreements coordinated by bodies like the African Union and ASEAN could harmonize verification protocols, regulate intermediation fees, and ensure post-adoption monitoring. |
| Transparent Financial Regulation | All adoption-related transactions must be disclosed through audited channels. Direct monetary exchanges beyond fixed procedural fees should be prohibited. |
| Capacity Building in Sending Countries | Training for judicial, social, and immigration officials, alongside national adoption registries, can strengthen oversight. International donors and receiving states should assist through technical and financial programs coordinated under ISS or UNICEF. |
| Post-Adoption Monitoring and Support | Creation of an international welfare network to ensure welfare checks, psychosocial support, and identity restoration for adoptees. Receiving countries should submit periodic reports to the sending country’s Central Authority. |
| Criminalization and Victim Justice Mechanisms | Universal jurisdiction provisions should permit prosecution of adoption trafficking as a transnational crime. Reparations frameworks should include restitution of citizenship, reunification, and compensation for victims. |
| Public Awareness and Ethical Adoption Campaigns | Educational efforts must counter the romanticized view of intercountry adoption, emphasizing ethical responsibility, transparency, and respect for cultural identity. |
| Integration of DNA Verification and Biometrics | DNA matching and biometric verification can confirm biological parenthood and prevent falsified abandonment records, coordinated internationally with INTERPOL. |
| Annual Global Review Forum on Ethical Adoption | A UN-convened forum to assess national compliance, share best practices, and facilitate dialogue among governments, NGOs, and adoptee advocacy groups. |
Together, these strategies would help realign intercountry adoption within a transparent, accountable, and child-centered framework grounded in human rights law and cooperative enforcement.
Conclusion
Intercountry adoption’s humanitarian ideals remain vital in global child protection—but they cannot coexist with systemic exploitation and trafficking. The challenge lies not in abandoning intercountry adoption but in reengineering it through justice-based, rights-oriented mechanisms.
Existing frameworks like the Hague Convention and CRC provide foundational principles, yet chronic enforcement failures, corruption, and insufficient cooperation cripple their efficacy.
Sustainable reform demands a paradigm shift toward global governance of adoption integrity—integrating digital traceability, international accountability, and survivor-centered justice. Each adoption must be ethical, transparent, and centered on the child’s best interests.
- Global data integration and real-time cooperation
- Reciprocal legal enforcement mechanisms
- Transparent and ethical adoption practices
- Survivor-centered justice and support
Ultimately, stricter international cooperation—anchored in shared data systems, reciprocal enforcement, and ethical solidarity—can transform intercountry adoption into a genuine protection mechanism, restoring its humanitarian purpose and ensuring that no child becomes a commodity in the global marketplace.
End Notes:
- Margaret Liu, Intercountry Adoption as Child Trafficking, 39 Val. U. L. Rev. 743 (2005)
- Shimla Law Journal, Manufactured Orphans: Exploitation in Intercountry Adoption Practices (Himachal Pradesh Nat’l L. U. 2023)
- Jennifer J. Herring, Curbing Child Trafficking in Intercountry Adoptions: Will the Hague Convention Work?, 12 Wash. Int’l L.J. 369 (2019)
- Jini Kim Watson, Towards a Critical Development Perspective on Intercountry Adoptions, 27 Glob. Soc. Pol’y 311 (2025)
- Office of the U.N. High Comm’r for Hum. Rts., Illegal Intercountry Adoptions Must Be Prevented and Eliminated: UN Experts (Sept. 28, 2022)
- United Nations, Child Adoption: Trends and Policies (Dep’t of Econ. & Soc. Affs. 2020)
- Hague Conference on Private International Law, Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption (May 29, 1993)
- Hague Conference on Private International Law, Toolkit for Preventing and Addressing Illicit Practices in Intercountry Adoption (2019)
- Intercountry Adoption – A Policy Overview, Hague Convention on International Adoption, Scribd (Oct. 21, 2025)
- Convention on the Rights of the Child arts. 7–21, Nov. 20, 1989, 1577 U.N.T.S. 3
- Amy E. Davis, Intercountry Adoption Fraud: How Poorly Implemented Legislation Affects Countries, Children, and Parents, 47 Cal. W. Int’l L.J. 401 (2017)
- Natasha D’Souza, Inter-Country Adoption: Challenges and the Way Forward, W. B. Nat’l U. Jurid. Sci. Working Paper No. 58 (2022)
- United Nations Human Rights Council, Tackling Illegal Adoptions and Addressing Rights of Victims (Mar. 7, 2017)
