Eamon Dunphy has said many times over the years, that the Irish media are far too compliant. Last week, when the Smoking Ban became law, you could see his point. While I agree that most people have taken to the ban, either with glee or reluctance, depending on whether or not they smoke, the vast majority of media coverage was effectively, pro-ban. Those who felt it was unfair, or over the top, were given their few seconds, or their line in print, but I didn't see too many reporters taking up the cudgels on their behalf. Are we to believe that every last journalist and editor in the Country thinks it was a great idea. Sorry, but we're not thick.

While a compliant media reporting the smoking ban, and generally taking a pro-ban stance is annoying, I've noticed a compliant stance on something else, which I find far more disturbing. I could fill several pages of this newspaper with the reasons why I am uncomfortable with the concept of foreign adoption. With so few children being placed for adoption here at home, these days, it has become far too popular for my liking to import children from China, Vietnam, Thailand, and other countries. Those involved in foreign adoption will tell you, with the best of intentions, about abandoned, unwanted babies, institutionalised and starving, and in need of a loving family. That's the romantic view of it, and the one we see in the papers. Earlier this week the Evening Herald carried a two page, nice as pie spread, about foreign adoption. The more realistic picture, sadly, is all too often one of children being taken, against the will of the mother, and sent half way around the world for a tidy profit. Don't tell me I'm wrong, because it happened here, and several of those 'unwanted orphans' are now friends of mine. So too are the mothers who apparently didn't want them. Now, it's just happening in reverse.

There is also the issue of identity. It drives me up the walls to see a gorgeous little Vietnamese or Chinese child (and they are stunningly beautiful children), named Ciara, Seamus or Sean. In the one act of taking away their native names, their heritage and background is cast away like a worn-out tee-shirt. I've stirred up the wrath of a few adoptive parents by asking, " how much Chinese do you speak?" All too often it is lost on them. Still, I'm afraid the practice is here to stay.

Two recent news items, one on BBC, one on ITV, were horrifying. In its 'Spotlight' series, BBC told the harrowing story of a set of Romanian twins, whose mother didn't even know they had been sent away. She thought they were still in Romania, in a Children's home, a few miles from her village.

A special investigation by the programme team, with the assistance of a brilliant Irish journalist called Ann McElhinny, revealed that the boys were internationally adopted without their mother's knowledge or consent. The family who 'adopted' them, in fact bought them, for a sum in the region of £24,000 Sterling. Incidentally, nobody knows who got that money, although it appears to have gone into the pocket of some baby-broker in Bucharest. Within months of his arrival in the North, one of the little boys was dead, his body a mass of fractures. His twin brother later suffered a fractured skull at the hands of his new 'Daddy'. While all this was going on, their birthmother still believed the twins were safe and sound, and being well cared for. She and her husband already had a large family, but were hoping to take their sons home when they could afford to. The mother, who is barely able to read, had been hoodwinked into signing a consent form, thinking it was something to do with the Romanian version of Children's allowance.

Romania banned international adoption in 2001, because of widespread corruption like this, but for these little two boys, whose birthnames were David and Samuel, it was too late. Two things struck me about this harrowing story. One, that it showed the dangers of placing children in the hands of people who shouldn't be allowed to keep a dog, and secondly, that there must be hundreds, if not thousands of mothers around the world, who don't know that their children are half a world away. I think I'll be asking another question in future, as well as 'how much Chinese do you speak'. I think I'll be asking — " does her mother know she's not in China?"

A few nights later, on the ITV News at Ten, came another horrific story, this time from Cambodia. A reporter was approached, as he entered a restaurant in Phnom Penh, by a young woman, who offered a baby to him, there and then, for twenty US Dollars. On investigation, he discovered that this practice was widespread. In modern Cambodia, babies are openly for sale on the streets. Many are being sold to 'orphanages', which then place them for adoption overseas. The people adopting these children will pay thousands of dollars, or Euros, to do so. Where is this money going? It's going to callous, wealthy baby brokers, getting rich on the misery of the Cambodian mother, and the desperation of some people to have a child of their own to rear. Widely known also, is the situation in Guatemala, where the Government there refuses to recognise UN law on the rights of the child. Children from Guatemala have been knowingly sold to American paedophiles, under the guise of a legal adoption. I know people will try to dispute this, but sadly, the proof is there. While the Adoption Board here recognises that Guatemala is not a proper place to adopt from, and advised prospective adopters of that back in 2002, it is still possible, if one wished to do so, to adopt from there to Ireland.

The three examples I've outlined, are outrageous and scandalous. Yet, precious few searching questions are asked of those promoting and romanticising international adoption, by the Irish media. There are now several thousand children in Ireland, who are internationally adopted. Was every one of those adoptions fully above board? Not just here, but at the other end? Can we be sure? Do the parents of Romanian or Chinese or Vietnamese children actually know that they are here? Where did the huge fees, handed over under the guise of legal costs, actually go, bearing in mind that there are no fees at this end, except perhaps for a suitability assessment? What about the children who have been sent back, unwanted, when it was discovered they had a special need? There are many questions needing many answers, yet our compliant, decent skin media fail to even ask them, let alone look for the answers.

© Inside Cork

The above article appeared in Inside Cork on 8th April 2004 and is reproduced here with the kind permission of the journalist.

* This headline was originally used in our editorial of May 2003. Eleven months later, Ireland is still no closer to ratififying the Hague Convention on the Protection of Children in Inter-Country Adoption. This is despite commitments from all governments going back to 1996. We therefore see no real relevance in changing our headline.