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.