We began this series of posts with our attention on kidnapping ... the Maddy McCann case, and the adopted child in Holland whose birth parents allegedly want him returned ... and that is nowhere near the situation of sacrificing one child for the good of others that often is given as a reason for relinquishment internationally. It is plain and simply a horrible crime.

Are there people who would take advantage of such a crime? Yes, of course. Are the overwhelmingly huge majority of adoptive parents the sort who would? No.

International adoptive parents are sometimes accused of not caring how their children came to them. Although it is true that some choose to focus thoughts on divine intervention instead of a real set of circumstances that involved searing loss no matter how noble or pragmatic the reasons for surrender, in my experience the great majority pray heartily that the authorities they depend on have done their jobs and can honestly assure their child came to adoption through ethical, although tragic, means.

Greedy agencies, corrupt officials, systems of government about as transparent as bologna, little value placed on children's lives ... any could result in a kidnapped child offered to a family for adoption. The world being what it is, this is bound to happen.

So, what can or should be done?

Most certainly it is the duty of every adoptive parent, international and domestic, to ask the hard questions, demand full disclosure of relevant facts, to dig, to investigate, to shine a light in all dark corners, to flush out rats and see they're caged.

It is the duty of governments to impose laws and uphold them, and since governments are people, the people must care enough to involve themselves and hold governments to account.

Agencies that conduct business without ethics should be closed down, or never allowed to open in the first place.

Should adoptions stop until birth countries, in most cases poor and poorly managed, raise themselves to an American standard of transparency ... whatever that is ... or until it can be guaranteed that no stolen child will ever be passed off as adoptable?

A noble thought, perhaps, but one that would leave millions of authentically adoptable kids in the lurch. Punishing the children ... the consequence of adoption bans and suspensions ... looks to be an easy fix, but it's wrong. It also in no way addresses this problems that might lead to child abductions in the first place, and takes a stand only directly in front of Western judgments protecting only Western sensibilities.

For the conclusion of this series, see the next post.

And if you've stopped by here looking for the Friday wrap of the week's Cambodian news, you can find it here.