‘Wanted: my biological family’, wrote a young woman on Instagram in June 2020. Like hundreds of Malagasy children, this 38-year-old mother was adopted in the 1980s in Antananarivo, at a time when the adoption market was governed by illegal bodies.
Opaque international adoption procedures led to a family tragedy: children separated from their parents, siblings scattered to the four corners of the world and lives destroyed. Corrupt networks facilitate these illegal adoptions. Today, the law has been revised to better protect children and families, and children separated from their loved ones are trying to find their roots. Law 2017-014 of 6 July 2017 defines the procedures, general provisions, conditions and financial contributions relating to adoption. The explanatory memorandum of this law states that “Adoption is a measure to protect children when they cannot grow up within their family of origin or if they cannot be entrusted to a member of their extended family or to a substitute family, such as a foster family. In the best interests of the child and with respect for his or her fundamental rights, adoption offers a child deprived of a family and parental care a permanent and definitive solution for growing up in a family environment.
However, the response to this right of the child must above all be a national solution so that the break with the child’s environment of origin is limited as far as possible. Can we still talk about the child’s best interests and respect for his or her rights if the child has been taken from his or her biological parents with a view to adoption, and the related procedures have been ambiguous? There is a fine line between involuntary national or international adoption and child trafficking.
A fabricated adoption
In June 2020, an announcement on social networks attracted attention: a young mother adopted by a French couple was looking for her biological family. So far, so normal. But the circumstances of her adoption, which took place in 1987, seemed unusual. In a publication, she wrote in black and white. ”I have it on good authority that my biological father actively tried to get us (editor’s note: her and her sister) back. Obviously, he didn’t seem to have agreed to give us up for adoption”. The 36-year-old mother appears to have been adopted illegally. The testimonies of the people involved in these cases corroborate this. The little girl, who would have been 2 years old in 1987 (according to the results of an X-ray of her wrist), was declared abandoned and of unknown parentage. This information appears in the birth certificate issued by the fifth arrondissement of Antananarivo on 25 March 1988, in accordance with the full copy signed at the registry office of the same arrondissement on 28 July 1987. The custody order was obtained by the Congregation of the sisters of St Joseph d’Aoste in mission at Analamahitsy. The judgement of 12 January 1998 ruled that the civil petition for adoption of the little girl was well-founded.
So why, 35 years later, is the main woman concerned saying that her father did not consent to the adoption? Explanations revealed that this young woman and her sister were taken in by a Madagascan foster family, mandated by the Congregation of the sisters of St Joseph of Aosta. A woman had abandoned them with this host family in Ampandrana. In the months that followed, the father of the two girls searched in vain for them.
In May 2021, the search conducted by our journalists following this announcement on social networks led to a meeting with the father of the two girls. Visibly weakened, he said: “I arrived in time to prevent the adoption of my two daughters. But the nuns (Sister MX and Sister L., both now deceased) threatened to take me to the police and put me in prison if I insisted on taking the girls back. That was the last time I saw them”. The father’s version is attested to by a letter from Sister MX dated 29 December 1987, addressed to the adoptive father JCM.
This is what was stated in the correspondence.
“… I must tell you about a detail concerning your daughter which may not disturb your happiness but which must be taken into account. It’s that the child’s father is still looking for her, in spite of the action you know about; he’s claiming her and her sister from our house in Analamahitsy, and – Sister L. tells me in her last letter – he’s going to go to court to find out more and have the judgement overturned. I believe that he can do this both in his own name and in the name of the mother who is not dead. I think that in view of these intentions and any legal proceedings that may be necessary, it would be a good idea to warn Maître R. that she would alert the children’s judge and the social worker. I’ll leave it up to you, but I recommend that you don’t delay in doing all the useful things that will protect you from trouble. Has the court ruling already given you the right to full adoption (2)? If so, have you been notified? In short, whatever happens in this case, make sure in advance that you have all the luck you need to stay out of trouble; that’s my best wish for a Happy New Year to us all”. This letter shows that the words ‘abandoned child, father and mother unknown’ on the birth certificate were fabricated. In fact, the nuns knew the identity and existence of the father and had met him on several occasions.
When is a child abandoned?
When can it be said that a child has been abandoned and that its parents are unknown? This is determined by articles 23 and 24 of law 2017-014 on adoption. According to the law, a child is declared ‘judicially abandoned’ if its father and mother are unknown. The judge declares a child abandoned on the express presentation of ‘a report describing the investigations and searches carried out by the judicial police to find the child’s legitimate family; a certificate of cessation of the searches; a certificate of unsuccessful searches based on the report on the said searches carried out, drawn up within at least three months of the referral to the judicial police officer’.
In the case of the young woman adopted by a French couple, the judgement handed down on 12 January 1988 was governed by Law 063/22 of 20 November 1963 on judicial adoption in Madagascar. ‘An irrevocable judgement’, we were told by a member of the Central Authority for Malagasy Adoption (ACAM), a body set up in 2007. Having heard the facts, our ACAM contact confirms that “this is indeed a case of trafficking and illicit practices (1). However, there is nothing the law can do”. The perpetrators of this crime and their accomplices, the woman who abandoned the girls, the foster family, the nuns, the district delegate, the social worker, the judge, the court clerk, the lawyer, the police and even the adoptive parents… will never be questioned. The mysteries surrounding this adoption will never be solved. Just like so many other similar cases.
Consequences for family life
The illicit practices and the court’s decision had a negative impact on the child, leading to a breakdown in the relationship between the young woman and her adoptive father. Indeed, the relationship between father and daughter deteriorated when the victim learned of the conditions of her adoption and the fact that her biological father had not granted the adoption. Even though in her letter Sister MX spoke of the child’s well-being, this was not enough to make her blossom. All the more reason for her to do everything in her power to find her family of origin. The young woman took a DNA test to confirm her ancestry and origins. The test results matched. Her next step is to find her sister, who was adopted by a family in Mahajanga. ‘My wish is to be able to reunite us all towards the end of 2021’, she hopes. A wish marred by the news of the death of their biological mother: according to the explanations of the siblings, she succumbed to heart disease.
Adoptions for sale and authorised trafficking
The case of these two young girls is not unique. According to the information we have gathered, ACAM receives around ten requests for tracing every year. But on social networks, notices of searches for biological families are also pouring in. ”We do our utmost to satisfy requesters according to the information we have. For notices on Facebook, we contact the people concerned and advise them on the steps to take,” explains Elda Narijaona, ACAM’s coordinator. Most of the searches are successful. At least for adoptions that took place after 2005, and after ACAM was set up in 2007. ”Information about a child’s origins is kept indefinitely. Only the adopted person and his or her descendants may have access to it upon request to the Court of First Instance concerned by the case, which will issue an Order authorising the opening of the file in question”. The reunion between the adopted person and his or her biological family is often painful. “Adoptees are confronted with the harsh reality of their parents’ misery. On one occasion, the adopted child went straight back to France as soon as he saw his mother”, ACAM tells us.
Adoptions carried out before 2004, the year in which Madagascar ratified the 1993 Hague Convention, and the publication of law 2005-014, have been at the heart of disputes. Litigation often leads to conflict between adoptees and adopters. “In the 80s and 90s, adoptions were at a premium, with almost 250 adoptions a year. These were adoptions carried out by illegal, non-standard adoption centres that only wanted to make a profit for themselves. We now have around sixty adoptions a year. We have also regularised the status of approved adoption centres. Most of these NGOs have been closed. Today, only 17 reception centres have accreditation, five of which have not been operational for some time”, explains another ACAM member. ACAM was forced to withdraw the approval of a reception centre in Antananarivo, which was run by a British woman this year. Malicious behaviour at the centre led to its closure.
To monitor an adopted child, a social worker and the adoptive parents must submit a report every six months for the first year of the adoption and once a year from the second year onwards. This report is sent to an authorised adoption body in the receiving country, which will forward it to ACAM. The production of such a report will cease as soon as the child reaches the age of majority. A reminder letter will be sent to the delegate of the authorised adoption body if no follow-up report is submitted or if the report does not comply with ACAM’s requirements. Today, international adoption is only permitted if the possibilities of placement or national adoption have been duly examined and exhausted.
Cover photo source: https://www.enfancejeunesseinfos.fr/
