A. Young

Statistics Transnational Adoptions to Sweden

Statistics Transnational Adoptions To Sweden 1969-2022

This data is sourced from the official website of The Family Law and Parental Support Authority (Myndigheten för Familjerätt och föräldraskapsstöd, MfoF) 2025-03-03. This data include all people born outside the Nordic countries who have been sent to Sweden for adoption. This data should cover most transnational adoptions to Sweden, including adoptions facilitated by adoption agencies as well as adoptions processed privately.

You can see separate data for transnational adoptions facilitated by Sweden’s largest adoptions agency Adoptionscentrum here.

Table Of Contents
  1. Statistics Transnational Adoptions To Sweden 1969-2022

Total Adoptions Per Year

This chart visualizes the number of international adoptions to Sweden per year from 1969 to 2022. The data highlights key trends in adoption over time:

  • Peak Years (Late 1970s – 1980s): The highest number of international adoptions occurred between the late 1970s and mid-1980s, with yearly totals exceeding 1,600–1,800 adoptions.
  • Lower plataue duing 1990s to mid 2000s: From the early 1990s onward, adoption numbers decreased and plateaued on a lower level compared to the peak years of the 1970s and 1980s. This shift is likely due to changes in international adoption policies, increased regulations, and efforts to prioritize domestic adoptions in sending countries.
  • Significant Drop After 2010: A steep decline is visible from 2010 onwards, with adoptions falling to a fraction of previous levels.

Total Adoptions by Country Per Year

This stacked area chart illustrates the number of international adoptions to Sweden per year, broken down by the top 10 sending countries. You can click on the country names in the legend (right side) to show or hide specific countries, allowing you to explore trends for individual countries.

  • South Korea, Colombia, and India were dominant sender countries, particularly during the 1970s and 1980s.
  • China’s international adoption peak occurred in the late 1990s and early 2000s.
  • A sharp decline is seen after 2010, mirroring the global reduction in intercountry adoptions due to increased regulation, ethical concerns, and prioritization of domestic adoption in sending countries.

Cumulative Adoptions Over Time

This chart shows the total number of international adoptions to Sweden over time, displaying a steady increase in the number of adoptees. This chart highlights the long-term impact of international adoption policies and the shift in global adoption practices over time.

  • Rapid Growth (1970s–1980s): The cumulative number of adoptions grew quickly during the 1970s and 1980s, reflecting Sweden’s high adoption rates during this period. This was when large numbers of children from countries like South Korea, Vietnam, and Colombia were adopted.
  • Slower Growth (1990s–2000s): The rate of increase slowed down after the 2000s, indicating a decline in new international adoptions.
  • Increasingly Slower Growth After 2010: The curve flattens in the 2010s, showing that very few new international adoptions have been recorded in recent years. This aligns with the tightening of international adoption regulations and shifting policies prioritizing domestic solutions for children.

Cumulative Adoptions by Country

This chart illustrates the cumulative number of international adoptions to Sweden over time, broken down by country. Each layer represents adoptees from a specific country, showing their contribution to Sweden’s adoption history. Click on country names in the legend to explore individual adoption trends and see how different countries contributed to Sweden’s adoption history.

Top 20 Sending Countries

This bar chart presents the 20 most common sending countries for international adoptions to Sweden between 1969 and 2022.

  • South Korea is the largest source country, accounting for 20.1% of all recorded adoptions. This reflects the country’s long history of transnational adoption industry.
  • India, Colombia, and China follow as major sending countries, each representing a significant share of total adoptions.

Adoption Heatmap

This heatmap provides a historical overview of international adoptions to Sweden from the top 20 sending countries over the period 1969–2022. It allows us to see when different countries were major sources of adoptees and how adoption patterns shifted over time. Hover over a tile to see the number of adoptions from a specific country a specific year.

How to Read the Heatmap

  • Each row represents a country, while the columns represent years from 1969 to 2022.
  • The color intensity represents the number of adoptions, with darker shades indicating fewer adoptions and brighter shades (yellow/green) indicating more adoptions.
  • White gaps indicate years where no recorded adoptions occurred from a specific country.

Why Log Scale?

  • The color scale uses a logarithmic scale, meaning that differences are more pronounced for smaller values while still capturing trends for countries with high adoption numbers.
  • This makes it easier to compare countries that had both low and high adoption rates over time.

Statistics Transnational Adoptions to Sweden Read More »

Statistics Transnational Adoptions to Sweden by Adoptionscentrum

Statistics on Transnational Adoptions to Sweden 1970-2024 Facilitated by Adoptionscentrum

The following data represents the number of adoptions facilitated by Adoptionscentrum between 1970 and 2024. Statistics on all transnational adoptions to Sweden are available here.

This data has been sourced from Adoptionscentrum’s official website. While other agencies were also active during this period, this analysis focuses specifically on Adoptionscentrum’s adoptions as they are Sweden’s largest adoption agency and played a leading role in Sweden’s transnational adoption landscape. Data was collected from Adoptioncentrum’s website on 2025-03-01.

Table Of Contents
  1. Statistics on Transnational Adoptions to Sweden 1970-2024 Facilitated by Adoptionscentrum

Total Adoptions Per Year

Each bar represents the number of children adopted in a given year. Hover over a specific year to see absolute adoption numbers as well as the percentage out of the total number of adoptions.

Total Adoptions by Country Over Time

This visualization illustrates the contribution of different countries to Sweden’s adoption numbers over time. The “Others” category groups countries outside the top 10 to maintain readability. You can click on the country names to the right to display or hide countries in the plot.

  • South Korea was the dominant source country for adoptions in the 1980s, but numbers fell significantly afterward.
  • China emerged as major adoption source in the 2000s.

Cumulative Adoptions Over Time

This chart represents the cumulative total number of adoptions over time. It provides a clearer picture of the overall impact of transnational adoptions to Sweden.

  • The number of children adopted into Sweden rose steadily until the mid-2000s.
  • After 2004, the cumulative curve flattens, reflecting the declining rate of adoptions.

Cumulative Adoptions by Country

This chart shows cumulative adoptions broken down by country over time. Hover over a specific year to see the cumulative number of adoptions for each country. For readability, only the top 10 sender countries are marked individually. The remaining countries are grouped in “Other”.

South Korea, Colombia, and India remain the highest contributors to Sweden’s adoption history.

Top 20 Sending Countries

This visualization ranks the top 20 countries that sent children for adoption to Sweden. Hover over a specific country to see the total number of adoptions from each, as well the the percentage of the total number of adoptions.

Colombia leads in total adoptions, followed by South Korea and India.

Adoption Heatmap

This heatmap provides a historical overview of international adoptions to Sweden from the top 20 sending countries over the period 1970–2024. It allows us to see when different countries were major sources of adoptees and how adoption patterns shifted over time. Hover over a tile to see the number of adoptions from a specific country a specific year.

How to Read the Heatmap

  • Each row represents a country, while the columns represent years from 1970 to 2024.
  • The color intensity represents the number of adoptions, with darker shades indicating fewer adoptions and brighter shades (yellow/green) indicating more adoptions.
  • White gaps indicate years where no recorded adoptions occurred from a specific country.

Why Log Scale?

  • The color scale uses a logarithmic scale, meaning that differences are more pronounced for smaller values while still capturing trends for countries with high adoption numbers.
  • This makes it easier to compare countries that had both low and high adoption rates over time.

Statistics Transnational Adoptions to Sweden by Adoptionscentrum Read More »

Transnational Adoptee Population in Sweden (2000–2023)

Transnational Adoptee Population in Sweden (2000–2023)

Transnational adoptees represent a significant part of Sweden’s demographic history. With this post, I aim to provide an updated visualization of the total international adoptee population in Sweden, using the latest available data from Statistics Sweden (Statistiska Centralbyrån, SCB), retrieved via their API as of 2025-02-26.

Unfortunately, this dataset does not specify adoptees’ countries of birth. It only represents individuals registered as adopted persons in Sweden born outside of Sweden, meaning we cannot separate adoptees by their country of origin.

Please note that the dataset reflects the number of adoptees registered as residents in Sweden during each observation year. The annual count does not indicate how many people were adopted in a given year. The difference in numbers between two years does not represent the number of new adoptees, as it also includes those who have passed away, emigrated, or re-immigrated.

Transnational Adoptee Population by Birth Cohort and Sex (2023)

The grouped bar chart displays the number of adoptees by birth cohort and sex in 2023. It shows that adoptees born in the 1970s and 1980s make up the largest groups, reflecting the peak period of transnational adoptions.

A notable gender difference is observed across all cohorts, with more women than men in most birth decades, particularly in the 1970s, 1980s, and 2000s. 

In more recent birth cohorts (2000s and 2010s), the number of adoptees has significantly declined, indicating the global decrease in international adoptions. The presence of a small number of adoptees from earlier decades (1920s–1950s) reflects aging adoptees who remain in the dataset.

Historic Transnational Adoptee Population in Sweden by Birth Cohort (2000–2023)

This stacked bar chart illustrates the distribution of adoptees in Sweden over time, segmented by birth cohort. The data again shows that adoptees born in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s represent the largest groups, reflecting the peak years of international adoption.

Over time, the proportion of older adoptees (1920s–1960s) declines, while newer cohorts (2000s and 2010s) grow but remain relatively smaller, indicating a significant decrease in transnational adoptions in recent decades.

 

Historic Transnational Adoptee Population in Sweden by Sex (2000–2023)

This line chart illustrates the number of international adoptees in Sweden over time, split by sex, from 2000 to 2023. The data highlights a consistent difference in numbers between men and women in the adoptee population throughout the observed period.

  • Steady Historic Increase: The number of adoptees in both groups grew over time, reflecting the ongoing practice of transnational adoption.
  • Gender Distribution: The number of women adoptees has remained higher than men, a trend seen in many international adoption programs.
  • Plateau in Recent Years: Around 2020, the growth levels off, suggesting that fewer international adoptees are entering the dataset, likely due to increased regulation, tightening of intercountry adoption laws, and political shifts emphasizing domestic child welfare alternatives.

This chart provides valuable insight into long-term adoption trends, including gender distribution and the slowing rate of international adoption in Sweden.

Key Takeaways

These visualizations provide an updated view of Sweden’s transnational adoptee population, highlighting long-term trends in gender distribution, birth cohorts, and overall numbers. The data reveals both the historical scale of transnational adoption to Sweden and its recent decline, reflecting shifts in global adoption policies, increased regulation, and changing societal perspectives on transnational adoption.

One key aspect missing from this dataset is the country of origin of adoptees, which is something I am particularly interested in exploring further. To gain a deeper understanding, I intend to reach out to Statistics Sweden to inquire whether supplementary data on adoptees’ birth countries can be provided. This would offer valuable insights into how adoption patterns have changed based on different sending countries.

Notes on Data & Methodology

This analysis was conducted using Statistics Sweden’s (SCB) open data API and retrieved using the pxweb R package. The data covers international adoptees by year, sex, and birth cohort from 2000 to 2023.

Data Granularity & Further Analysis:
This dataset provides aggregated counts of international adoptees in Sweden with the following dimensions:

  • Observation Year (2000–2023): The year in which adoptees were counted as residents in Sweden.
  • Year of Birth (Grouped into birth cohorts): Allows analysis of different generational trends.
  • Sex (Male/Female): Enables demographic comparisons.
  • Count: The number of adoptees registered in Sweden for each category.

There are many ways to explore this data further. If you’re interested in visualizing a specific cohort by sex or other breakdowns, feel free to reach out! 📩

Data Source:
Statistics Sweden (2025). “Adopted persons by sex, year of birth, observations, and year.”
[Data accessed 2025-02-26 10:51:00 using pxweb R package 0.17.0],

R Package Used:
The data was retrieved using pxweb, an R package for interacting with PXWEB APIs.

GitHub Repo for the pxweb package: 
pxweb package written by Mans Magnusson, Markus Kainu, Janne Huovari, and Leo Lahti (rOpenGov). pxweb: R tools for PXWEB API.

Disclaimer:
I do not work at Statistics Sweden (SCB), and the interpretations in this post are based on general assumptions about how official population statistics are structured. As someone working in data, I approach this dataset with a methodological perspective, but I encourage others—especially those with expertise in demographic statistics—to share insights or corrections if needed.

 

Transnational Adoptee Population in Sweden (2000–2023) Read More »

Visualizing the Numbers Behind the “Orphan-Making” System

Visualizing the Numbers Behind the Korean "Orphan-Making" System

 

The numbers presented in the graphs come from Lee Kyung-eun’s (Ph.D. in law) research (Korea Times, April 2022), where she analyzes statistics from the Judicial Almanac of Korea and the Ministry of Health and Welfare. These figures highlight how children were systematically registered as orphans to facilitate international adoption—even when their biological parents were known.

Link to full article Court Submission on the ‘Orphan-Making’ Process (Korea Times, April 2022) here. 

Data Visualization: Illustrating the Correlation between False Family Registrations and Overseas Aodptions 

What Do These Numbers Represent?

  • Orphan Hojuk Registrations: the number of child-only family registrations issued after an “abandoned child” report was filed. These were meant to document children with no known parents.
  • Adopted overseas: the number of inter-country adoptions recorded by Korea’s Ministry of Health and Welfare.

As Lee highlights in her article, the number of children registered as “orphans” closely correlates with the number of children adopted overseas. The visualizations reinforce this pattern, showing that throughout the late 1970s and 1980s, the two numbers were nearly identical. However, from the 1990s onward, a structural shift emerges, with a widening gap between abandoned children and international adoptions. This reflects policy changes aimed at gradually reducing South Korea’s reliance on international adoption.

Recommended Reading

For a deeper understanding of the legal mechanisms behind this system, I highly recommend the following articles by Lee Kyung-eun. They provide a detailed breakdown of how the adoption system functioned, including:

    • How family registrations were manipulated to classify children as “orphans” for adoption.
    • The legal violations committed by adoption agencies and the Korean government.
    • Why the majority of Korean adoptees were not actually abandoned children.

📄  Court Submission on the ‘Orphan-Making’ Process (Korea Times, April 2022)
📄  Adam Crapser vs. Republic of Korea (Korea Times, March 2022)

Visualizing the Numbers Behind the “Orphan-Making” System Read More »

My Adoption Timeline

My Adoption Timeline Shows How I Was Processed for Adoption Before I Existed

The dominant adoption narrative claims that international adoption “rescues” orphaned children who would otherwise grow up in the streets or in institutions. But looking at how transnational adoption evolved, particularly in the 1970s and 1980s in Korea, it becomes clear that it was not the supply of orphaned children that dictated adoption numbers—it was the demand for babies in the West.

I have always wondered about the adoptees who arrived in the West as very young infants. We were often told that adoptive parents waited for years for a child. But if that was the case, how did so many adoptees still arrive as infants?

My own adoption timeline is a clear example of this:

  • My adoptive parents applied to adopt a child from Korea a full year before I was even born.
  • The adoption process was set in motion before I even existed—before my Korean mother was pregnant with me.

This has always been a nagging question at the back of my consciousness:

If transnational adoption was about finding homes for children who needed them, why were adoptive parents already in line for a child who didn’t yet exist?

The answer is uncomfortable but undeniable: The Adoption Industry evolved into something that was not about responding to a surplus of orphaned children. It was about ensuring a steady supply to meet Western demand.

My Own Adoption Timeline

Looking at my own case, the order of events is revealing—and unsettling. This timeline makes it clear that my adoption was in motion before I even existed, raising serious questions about how international adoption was structured to meet demand.

Why This Timeline Matters

This timeline isn’t just a record of my adoption—it’s evidence of how the adoption system worked.

  • Before I was conceived, adoptive parents were already waiting for me.
  • Before I was born, my country of adoption had already been decided.
  • Before I took my first breath, my adoption was already being processed.

This was not about finding homes for existing children. This was about ensuring a constant supply of babies to meet Western demand.

Adoption should be about child welfare—not efficiency, speed, and profit.

My Adoption Timeline Read More »

Swedish Adoption Agency Adoptionscentrum Was Aware of False Orphan Registrations

Swedish Adoption Agency Adoptionscentrum Was Aware of False Orphan Registrations

For years, the deeply unethical, illicit, and in some cases criminal practices of the international adoption industry—such as baby farming and falsified documents—have come to light. Yet, the Swedish adoption agency Adoptionscentrum has consistently denied having any knowledge of wrongdoing, including the systematic falsification of family registrations in Korea.

However, in my own adoption records, I found a Country Memorandum on adoption from Korea, issued by Adoptionscentrum. This document was sent to prospective adoptive parents waiting to adopt from Korea, explaining the process of transferring Korean children to Sweden. It explicitly states that creating these orphan hojuks (family registers) was standard procedure.

What Adoptionscentrum Claims Today

On their website, Adoptionscentrum presents the following explanation regarding suspicions of false family registrations:

English translation:

The country representative for South Korea at Adoptionscentrum, Ida Wilhelmsson, has contacted our partner organization in South Korea, Korea Welfare Services (KWS), which explains that the suspicions regarding false family registrations are related to South Korea’s previous adoption legislation.Until 2012, adoption organizations were required to create a new “Family Register” for:

– Children who had been anonymously abandoned.
– Children who were relinquished with consent, but where the biological parents had not registered the child in the family’s “Family Register.”
– Children who were relinquished with consent, but where the adoption organization had not been informed that the child was already registered in the biological family’s “Family Register” (i.e., cases of double registration).

It is the last case that may explain why some adoptees from South Korea during this period have dual identities. We know that KWS saved the available information about the biological family in the adoptee’s file with the intention of providing it to the adoptee during a birth search. However, we do not know whether this was the case for Holt and KSS.

A Weak Excuse Disguised as an Explanation

Adoptionscentrum claims that false family registrations were merely an administrative necessity in cases of anonymous abandonment. While this could be true in some cases, their explanation is exposed as a blatant falsehood when applied to children whose biological parents were known.

Why were these children registered as orphans when the adoption agency had clear records of their biological parents?

Their response conveniently sidesteps the real issue—this was not just a bureaucratic formality; it was deliberate child laundering.

The creation of false orphan status was a systematic practice designed to erase children’s true identities and manufacture “adoptable” children to meet international demand. This was not an accident. It was policy.

Adoptionscentrum’s Own Documentation Proves Their Awareness

How unfortunate for Adoptionscentrum that I happened to find this very document in my adoption files—sent to all prospective adoptive parents who were waiting to adopt from Korea.

Country Memorandum: Korea (Adoptionscentrum, 1983)

“A family register is created for each child, and Mr. Tahk applies for guardianship. As the child’s guardian, he/SWS can then apply for a passport and later transfer custody to the Swedish parents.”

Here we have documented evidence showing that Adoptionscentrum was fully aware that the Korean adoption agency routinely created these false family registrations.

Adoptionscentrum Knew—or They Failed. Either Way, They Must Be Stopped

Given the overwhelming evidence that has surfaced in recent years, if Adoptionscentrum truly had no knowledge of these fraudulent practices, this in itself should be the strongest argument for immediately halting their involvement in transnational adoption.

If their claims of ignorance are true, then we must ask:

  • How could an agency processing thousands of adoptions be so unaware of systemic fraud?
  • What does this say about the lack of legal oversight in Sweden’s international adoption system?
  •  If they had no knowledge, how can we trust them to conduct ethical adoptions in the future?

Either they knew and covered it up, or they were so incompetent that they failed to see the fraud happening under their watch. Either way, they should not be entrusted with another single adoption.

Adoptionscentrum continues to gaslight adoptees, cover up past actions, and deflect responsibility. But the truth is out in the open. Their own documents betray them.

They knew. They participated. They profited.

Swedish Adoption Agency Adoptionscentrum Was Aware of False Orphan Registrations Read More »

Paper Orphans: How Korean Children Were Made Orphans for Transnational Adoption

Paper Orphans: How Korean Children Were Made Orphans for Transnational Adoption

For decades, Korean adoption agencies and government institutions manipulated the legal identities of children to facilitate transnational adoption. A crucial step in the baby supply pipeline, was the creation of an “orphan hojuk” (orphan family registration) —a legal maneuver that falsely classified children as orphans, even when the Korean parents were known.

This process is a clear example of child laundering, where children’s identities were deliberately altered to make them appear legally available for adoption in the receiving country.

While some of these practices operated in a legal gray zone, where laws may not have explicitly criminalized the misrepresentation of children’s identities, they were deeply unethical. It was a system put in place that prioritized Western demand over children’s rights and erased their true identities.

How This System Worked

As Lee Kyung-eun (Ph.D. in law) explains in her article, Court Submission on the ‘Orphan-Making’ Process (The Korea Times, 2022), the process of sending Korean babies abroad for adoption followed a systematic legal reclassification. Babies were first registered as orphans through an orphan hojuk, severing their legal ties to their biological family. Adoption agencies then appointed themselves as legal guardians, allowing them to apply for passports and visas on the child’s behalf. Once emigration approval was granted, the child was sent overseas, where guardianship was transferred to adoptive parents before a final adoption ruling in the receiving country’s court.

Creating a False Family Register – the Orphan Hojuk

Adoption agencies systematically created new “orphan hojuks” for children acquired for overseas adoption. In a memo from 1983 on Korean adoption written by the Swedish adoption agency Adoptionscentrum, it is explicitly stated that the Korean adoption agency created this family registration for every child.

On paper, this erased all ties to their biological family—even when parents were alive and their identities known.

This reclassification was not just about severing legal ties to biological parents—it was a necessary step to facilitate international adoption. By fabricating an orphan status, adoption agencies ensured the child met the legal criteria for emigration, immigration, and adoption processing in the receiving country. Without this step, many children would not have been eligible for overseas adoption under the laws of receiving countries.

Appointment of a Guardian – The Adoption Agency Gains Full Control

Once a child was labeled as abandoned, the adoption agency could legally assume guardianship through an official procedure called “Appointment to Guardian of Minor Orphan in Orphanage.” In my case, the president of the adoption agency processing my adoption, Social Welfare Society (SWS), Mr. Tahk, became my legal guardian.

This critical step granted the agency full control over the child, allowing them to move forward with all necessary legal procedures to send the child abroad.

As the appointed guardian, the adoption agency could:

  • Apply for a passport on the child’s behalf.
  • Initiate the emigration process by submitting visa and adoption paperwork.
  • Approve the child’s transfer to adoptive parents without further involvement from the biological family.

By laundering the child’s identity through an orphan hojuk and assuming legal guardianship, the adoption agency removed the child from the jurisdiction of their birth family and made them eligible for international adoption. This step was essential in ensuring that the child could be legally processed for emigration and adoption in the receiving country.

Why Was This Process Put in Place?

To Make International Adoption Easier

Many receiving countries had stricter adoption laws for children with known parents, requiring court approvals. Reclassifying children as orphans bypassed these safeguards, speeding up the process to enable agencies to send as many children abroad as possible.

To Avoid Complications with Parental Rights

If Korean parents remained on record, they could revoke consent or challenge the adoption. By erasing parents from legal documents, agencies ensured the adoption could not be stopped once the child had left Korea.

To Make the Child More “Adoptable”

For adoptive parents, it was more desireble to adopt an abandoned child than a child with living, known family members. The system catered to this preference by fabricating orphanhood, making the process emotionally and legally smoother for adoptive families.

To Meet the Demand for Babies

Transnational adoption was highly lucrative, and agencies needed a constant supply of children to send abroad. The pressure to process adoptions quickly was fueled by competition between agencies, each striving to meet the demand from receiving countries. Falsifying orphan status ensured a steady flow of “adoptable” children—at the cost of their true identities, severed family ties, and lifelong consequences for the adoptees.

Legal and Ethical Implications

Fraudulent Classification

By fabricating orphan status, adoption agencies altered children’s legal identities, potentially violating both Korean law and international human rights standards. This deliberate misclassification ensured that children met legal requirements for adoption and emigration, often without their biological parents’ full understanding or consent.

Loss of Identity

Adoptees whose records were falsified lost access to their true origins. Many only discovered as adults that they had living, known Korean parents—sometimes after it was too late to reunite with them. 

Even when adoptees attempt to reclaim their history, many report that adoption agencies refuse to provide their adoption documents—records that could contain information about their Korean family. 

Potential Human Trafficking Violations

Child laundering is a recognized form of human trafficking, where children are fraudulently declared as orphans and placed for international adoption under false pretenses.

While these adoptions may have been legally facilitated, they raise serious concerns about informed consent, identity falsification, and the prioritization of Western demand over children’s rights. Adoption should be about finding homes for children who truly need them, not about manufacturing orphans for profit.

The Lasting Impact of Adoption Fraud on Adoptees

The unethical—and potentially illegal—processing of our adoptions is not just a dark chapter in our histories; it is something we carry for life. Instead of acknowledging their wrongdoings, adoption agencies deny responsibility, refuse accountability, and offer no apologies. Worse, when we seek the truth, we are gaslit, shamed, and dismissed by the agencies that profited from our adoptions.

Adoptees who have searched for answers about their adoption paperwork have been stonewalled and silenced by the adoption agencies. I, along with other adoptees in Sweden, have faced this firsthand when trying to get answers from Adoptionscentrum.

We were not orphans. Our identities were laundered, erased, and rewritten to serve the adoption industry.

We are surviving transnational and transracial adoption.

We are surviving the continued abuse of our adoption agencies. 

Back to Main Page

Paper Orphans: How Korean Children Were Made Orphans for Transnational Adoption Read More »

Reclaiming the Adoption Narrative

Reclaiming the Adoption Narrative

I am pushing back against the dominant adoption narrative.

The narrative that describes my life as being a Korean orphan saved by adoption, given a better life in the West. The narrative that has told me that I should be grateful and happy. The narrative that continues to reinforce that—regardless of the pain inflicted on me in my new life in the West—it is better than what my life would have been if I had stayed in Korea.

But for me, transnational and transracial adoption is survival.

For me…

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving family separation.

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving attachment trauma.

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving racial and ethnic displacement.

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving culture and language erasure.

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving racism in your own immediate family.

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving racism at kindergarten.

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving racism at school.

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving racism at the workplace.

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving racism among your friends.

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving being Korean with white parents who do not have the skills to help you navigate racism in a white society.

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving being Korean with white parents who do not think racism is something that happens to you—because you are ‘Swedish’ and ‘assimilated.’

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving internalized racism.

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving gaslighting.

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving shaming.

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving racial discrimination.

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving hating to look at your own reflection.

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving hating your Korean body.

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving the grief of losing your Korean family.

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving the grief of losing your Korean family history.

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving not knowing if your Korean mother held you in her arms when you were born.

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving realizing that the adoption trauma is intergenerational.

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving seeing your own children struggle with racial and ethnic displacement.

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving the heartbreak of trying to comfort my children when they grieve not knowing their Korean family.

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving trying to find good answers to my children when they ask why they cannot learn Korean in school.

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving wondering to what extent your origin story is true.

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving wondering to what extent your adoption paperwork has been falsified.

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving wondering if you would have stayed in Korea if it had not been for the unethical, illicit, and illegal ways the adoption agencies collected children to feed into the adoption trade to the West.

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving wondering how it can be that the Korean adoption industry resulted in millions of dollars in profit, yet adoptees struggle to find financial means to travel to Korea, pay for therapy, and pay for resources to learn Korean.

Transnational and transracial adoption is surviving wondering how come you have to be a paying member of the Swedish adoption agency Adoptionscentrum to get help with finding your Korean family—even when your adoptive parents have already paid thousands of dollars for your adoption fee.

With time I have realized that my adoption is not something I can ever heal from.

It is a wound—inflicted on me by the adoption industry—that keeps getting deeper and more painful the more I understand the extent of how much has been taken from me, done to me, and done to my Korean family.

For decades, the darker sides of transnational adoption have been drowned out by the dominant adoption narrative—a discourse controlled by adoption agencies, governments, and lobbyists. But now, the human trafficking-like practices behind it are finally being exposed. In Korea, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission is investigating the unethical and illicit practices that fueled mass international adoption, while in Sweden, Adoptionskommissionen (S 2021:08) is examining the extent of misconduct in Sweden’s international adoption system. These are long-overdue steps toward accountability and justice.

But while these investigations are in progress, adoption agencies are lobbying to preserve transnational adoption—resorting to gaslighting and deflecting the legitimate questions raised by adoptees. That is why I believe it is more important than ever to use my voice and bear witness—to speak the truth about what this unprecedented human experiment of transnational adoption has done to me, and to so many others.

Back to Main Page

Reclaiming the Adoption Narrative Read More »

Scroll to Top