Playing by the Rules

What the Hague Convention says about transnational adoption.

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

Intercountry adoptions are accompanied by a host of complicated legal issues. When an American adopts a child from Guatemala, whose laws apply? And how can everyone be sure that a baby hasn’t been stolen from her mother? These matters were addressed in 1993 by the Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption, which established a set of ground rules that all member countries must follow. The rules are designed to ensure that adoptions are ethical, and also that they are recognized by the nations that have joined the Convention.

The U.S. signed on in 1994, but is only now about to “join,” which entails implementing the Convention’s requirements. The thirteen-year delay can be blamed on legislative inertia and a long stripe of bureaucratic red tape. In 2000, Congress passed and President Clinton signed a bill called the Intercountry Adoption Act (or IAA), which designated the State Department as the Hague-mandated “central authority,” responsible for compliance, record keeping, and statistical reporting. The State Department has averred that the United States will be up to speed by the end of the year.

Controversy surrounding the Convention and the attendant IAA has been fierce. One point of contention is a requirement that anyone overseeing an intercountry adoption hold a master’s degree in social work, a rule that necessarily disqualifies a good number of experienced caseworkers. Another objection comes from small American adoption agencies, which argue that stringent new regulations oblige them to purchase additional insurance, thereby forcing them to raise their fees and potentially driving them out of business.

Adoption agencies are not alone in finding fault with the Convention. Critics claim that requirements for increased bureaucracy unfairly burden the so-called “giving” countries and some, such as Russia and South Korea, have declined to join. Given that there often exists a cultural hostility toward adoption by non-relatives or foreigners, “taking” countries are concerned that nations like China, Russia, and South Korea will turn their efforts toward raising orphans and opt out of the adoption apparatus altogether.

Overall, however, it seems that the Convention will be a net gain for potential adoptive parents in the United States. Countries like Mexico and Brazil, which are Hague members, generally only allow adoptions to other member countries. Once the United States is up to speed, children from those nations will become more readily available to Americans. Children from non-member countries will continue to be available also; a curious loophole in the Convention allows member states to adopt from non-members. Guatemala, however, a popular adoption spot for Americans, may become off-limits. Because Guatemala is a Hague member that currently does not meet the Convention’s standards, the U.S. likely will face serious pressure to cancel all Guatemalan adoptions.


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend