Despite claims that the babybox saves lives, infanticides in Korea are continuing…
Abandonments had been going steadily down for three years before the babybox was created. After the babybox was created, abandonments have gone steadily up. In other words, the babybox encourages abandonment as a legitimate form of child welfare. Women may be pressured into abandoning their child this way by boyfriends or parents…
Despite the fact that there was a small, yet diminishing, child abandonment problem for years and the babybox was made in 2009, we heard nothing from the adoption agencies about this until 2012, when their business became more regulated by the Special Adoption Law.
We did hear about abandonment from the adoption agencies, however, less than two months after the law was implemented. It means that they and their supporters did not wait to see the effect of the law enforcement. Usually in public policy, you have to wait a year in order to evaluate an intervention. Instead, the adoption agencies and their supporters artificially announced that there was a crisis and then proceeded to create one. They have actually created the problem that they say they are trying to prevent. [by creating a media circus which has brought more and more attention to the babybox, making mothers think this is a viable option]
Abandonments have risen. This is true. However, abandonments did not rise in a statistically significant way directly following the implementation of the Special Adoption Law. They shot up after legislation was introduced to re-revise the Special Adoption Law and there was high media attention on the box. This began in January 2013.
The adoption agencies have a monetary incentive to support this legislation in order secure an endless supply of babies who cannot trace their families of origin. In other words, they want to continue business as they have for the past 60 years.
People are abandoning children because of their misunderstanding of the law, not what the law actually says. The media has incorrectly reported the function of the Special Adoption Law. The real problem is the Family Registration Law (which needs to be strengthened for privacy) and weak Single Parent Law (which needs to be strengthened to sufficiently support single parents). Just like you, Korean moms are not going to run out and get the statutes themselves. They learn from the media and act on what they have learned.
this proves exactly what i was saying when the babybox doesn’t deter women who would otherwise leave their babies to die on the street. rather, it deters women who would otherwise relinquish their children safely and legally through an ethical adoption!! these mothers clearly exhibit that they understand that abandoning babies on the road to die is wrong by the very fact that they’ve chosen to go to the babybox and not abandon in the street. assuming that if the babybox was not there, they would abandon them on the side of the road is faulty logic. by the same logic alone, it is just as reasonable to assume that if the babybox was not there, they would go one step further (not one step back) and ensure the baby is adopted ethically (which the babybox does not allow for). having worked extensively with unwed mothers in korea (as well as women who lost their children by adoption - almost always through coercion or force) i can say with confidence that the babybox simply provides a moral grey space for mothers who would otherwise give up for ethical adoption or choose to raise their child (if economic and social support were available). even worse, creates a situation (like mine), when people who are not the mother (or father) can give up for adoption.
the graph also shows that the increases in abandonment are unrelated to the special adoption law but rather, to an increase in media reports on the babybox. due to the increase in these stories, mothers are led to believe that the babybox is a viable option for their children. this is dangerous and unethical reporting at its worst.
