Conclusion: Re-Kinning First Mothers

  • Riitta Högbacka


The concluding chapter sketches the contours of a more just adoption system, which would address the distortions caused by uneven power and vital inequality. The findings of previous chapters are interpreted from the frameworks of reproductive justice and transnationalism. Instead of framing transnational adoption as a privileged individualised choice, these approaches concentrate on increasing the range of options for all women and reveal the connectivity between giving and receiving children in adoption. In addition, attention is given to the clash between first mothers’ concerns and the Global North-centric understandings of family and adoption inherent in the current adoption system.


International Treaty Adoptive Parent Adoptable Child Hague Convention Adoptive Family 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. A Decade of Transition. (2001). Regional monitoring report 8. The Monee Project, CEE/CIS/Baltics. UNICEF, Innocenti Research Centre, Florence, Italy.Google Scholar
  2. Ahmed, S. (2000a). Who knows? Knowing strangers and strangerness. Australian Feminist Studies, 15(31), 49–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berge, J. M., Mendenhall, T. J., Wrobel, G. M., Grotevant, H. D., & McRoy, R. G. (2007). Adolescents’ feelings about openness in adoption: Implications for adoption agencies. Child Welfare, LXXXV(6), 1011–1039.Google Scholar
  4. Bhambra, G. K. (2014). Connected sociologies. London/New Delhi/New York/Sydney: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  5. Butler-Sweet, C. (2014). ‘Acting White’ and ‘acting Black’. Exploring transracial adoption, middle-class families, and racial socialization. In V. Bashi Treitler (Ed.), Race in transnational and transracial adoption. Basingstoke/New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  6. Cantwell, N. (2003). Intercountry adoption. A comment on the number of ‘Adoptable’ children and the number of Persons seeking to adopt internationally. The Judge’s Newsletter, V(Spring 2003). A publication of the Hague Conference on Private International Law.Google Scholar
  7. Cantwell, N. (2014). The best interests of the child in intercountry adoption. Florence: Innocenti Insight and UNICEF Office of Research. https://www.unicefirc. org/publications/712/. Accessed 12 Oct 2016.Google Scholar
  8. Chrisler, J. C. (2012). Introduction. What is reproductive justice. In J. C. Chrisler (Ed.), Reproductive justice: A global concern. Santa Barbara: Praeger.Google Scholar
  9. Cornwall, A., & Rivas, A. (2015). From ‘gender equality and ‘women’s empowerment’ to global justice: Reclaiming a transformative agenda for gender and development. Third World Quarterly, 36(2), 396–415.Google Scholar
  10. Courtney, M. & Piliavin, I. (1998). Struggling in the adult world. Washington Post, 21 July.Google Scholar
  11. Ferguson, J. (2006). Global shadows. Africa in the neoliberal world order. Durham/London: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Gaard, G. (2010). Reproductive technology, or reproductive justice? An ecofeminist, environmental justice perspective on the rhetoric of choice. Ethics and the Environment, 15(2), 103–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ge, X., Natsuaki, M. N., Martin, D. M., Leve, L. D., Neiderhiser, J. M., Shaw, D. S., Villareal, G., Scaramella, L., Reid, J. B., & Reiss, D. (2008). Bridging the divide: Openness in adoption and postadoption psychosocial adjustment among birth and adoptive parents. Journal of Family Psychology, 22(3), 529–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gray, B. (2011). Empathy, emotion and feminist solidarities. In R. Willemijn & K. Steenbergh (Eds.), Sexed sentiments: Interdisciplinary perspectives on gender and emotion (Critical studies series, Vol. 34). Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi.Google Scholar
  15. Grotevant, H., McRoy, R., Wrobel, G., & Ayers-Lopez, S. (2013). Contact between adoptive and birth families: Perspectives from the Minnesota/Texas adoption project. Child Development Perspectives, 7(3), 193–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Henney, S. M., Ayers-Lopez, S., McRoy, R., & Grotevant, H. D. (2007). Evolution and resolution: Birthmothers’ experience of grief and loss at different levels of adoption openness. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 24(6), 875–889.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hoelgaard, S. (1998). Cultural determinants of adoption policy: A Colombian case study. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 12(2), 202–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Högbacka, R. (2014). Intercountry adoption, countries of origin, and biological families. K. E. Cheney (Ed.) (ISS working paper series, general series, Vol. 598). International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University, Accessed 12 Oct 2016.
  19. Khanna, R. (2001). Ethical ambiguities and specters of colonialism: Futures of transnational feminism. In E. Bronfen and M. Kavka (Eds.), Feminist consequences: Theory for the new century. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Latchford, F. J. (2012). Reckless abandon. The politics of victimization and agency in birthmother narratives. In F. J. Latchford (Ed.), Adoption and mothering. Bradford/Ontario: Demeter Press.Google Scholar
  21. Neil, E. (2010). The benefits and challenges of direct post-adoption contact: Perspectives from adoptive parents and birth relatives. ALOMA: Revista de Psicologia, Ciències de l’Educació i de l’Esport, 27, 89–115.Google Scholar
  22. Penn, H. (2009). The parenting and substitute parenting of young children. In G. Bentley & R. Mace (Eds.), Substitute parents. New York/Oxford: Berghahn Books.Google Scholar
  23. Pratt, M. L. (1992). Imperial eyes. Travel writing and transculturation. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective. What is reproductive justice? Accessed 12 Oct 2016.
  25. Smolin, D. (2007). Intercountry adoption and poverty: A human rights analysis. Capital Law Review, 36(2), 413–453.Google Scholar
  26. Varnis, S. L. (2001). Regulating the global adoption of children. Society, 38(2), 39–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. West, R. (2014). From choice to reproductive justice: De-constitutionalizing abortion rights. In R. West, J. Murray, & M. Esser (Eds.), Gender in law, culture, and society: In search of common ground on abortion: From culture war to reproductive justice. Burlington: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  28. Yngvesson, B. (2010). Belonging in an adopted world. Race, identity, and transnational adoption. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Riitta Högbacka
    • 1
  1. 1.University of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland

Personalised recommendations