where brown people are much more visible — but from some small town in Iowa. Then I might have some issues.

sure, there are issues. but it isn't like this is ever going to be an epidemic, so think the fact that these people really, really, really want to be parents, and don't care about skin color compared to that, should trump all.

just checked, a few white racist sites are talking about them. rule of thumb, if they hate this, shouldn't we like this? :-) though seriously, it is a personal decision. a race doesn't raise a baby, a family does.

a race doesn't raise a baby, a family does.

we have close family friends who are 'indian'...they adopted a 'white' girl when she was 2 yrs old.. and raised her.. she is now in her mid 20's.. went to INDIA for medical school (by choice!)..and is likely more indian...then most of us (myself included..)..

I'm just shocked that having a mixed-race baby disqualifies you for adoption. I was with you--why not adopt instead--but why would having a mixed-race baby disqualify you? Anybody know?

Seriously? Having a mixed-race child limits your chances of adopting in the UK? That’s racist!

That's not true. There must be some other criteria involved, possibly on her side, that either put her far down the adoption list or off it altogether.

Adoption agencies in the UK are hyper politically correct so the mixed race baby being a bar to adoption is most likely sloppy journalism. Agencies will always give preference to suitable couples of the ethnic background of the child --- it may well be that she insisted she wanted to adopt a mixed race, black or Asian child only and was told she would have to join a queue or something along those lines.

In my home town a white couple adopted a 2 girls who were sisters from Sri Lanka and those 2 girls ended up being honor students.

Wasn't there a story last year on this website about girls from India being adopted by families in Minnesota, and about there 1st trip back to India, to the orphange from where they were adopted.

As a gora who's looked into adopting an Indian baby a few times, I've noticed many of the agencies in India who wouldn't let me adopt because I'm white. It makes me sad when I think about the stories I've seen about children growing up in extreme poverty, or, for example, girl babies being murdered, to think that there's such a stupid roadblock to adoption for some as skin color, but it exists.

Maybe those agencies just prefer for the children they deal with to be adopted by Indian families Maurice, don't take it personally --- plus there are many many Indian children who are adopted abroad so you just need to find the right agencies.

It's interesting to me that adoption is such a rigorous process, but embryo adoption is not (at least, from what the article says).

I wonder if the person in the original news-story might not have been able to adopt because she already had a child, and could presumably also have another - than that her child was 'mixed-race'. Also, it is possible that having 'mixed-race' children in the UK is correlated with various other undesirable attributes from the agency's pov, such as low income, job-instability, etc. Somebody on SM a few threads ago was talking about how, although Caribs are 'assimilated' in the UK, in terms of mixed race marriages etc, that does not mean they are doing well by SES measures, in either the first or the second generation. Also, I do not know how much weight to give to Maurice's anecdote, since Indian kids adopted by 'white' parents in the US certainly do exist.

if you read the article her 'mixed-race' child is half-arab. just to be clear.

Losing our baby girl at 23 weeks, I can see my self going through this if I'm not able to conceive again! We are "Indian" but even if we weren't, I think we would adopt an embryo.....may the embroyo be white, black, red, or brown. I agree, a race does not raise a baby, a FAMILY does.

It's interesting to me that adoption is such a rigorous process, but embryo adoption is not (at least, from what the article says).

At the risk of opening a can of worms, it might be an issue of what the Indian government considers to be the start of a life.

It's interesting to me that adoption is such a rigorous process, but embryo adoption is not (at least, from what the article says).

I was just thinking the same thing. It's funny too that most of the comments here are focused on the mixed race issue, and not so much the embryo buying issue.

Probably been discussed to death before! ;)

Seriously? Having a mixed-race child limits your chances of adopting in the UK? That’s racist!

I shudder when i think of the women in this situation. What conditions have forced them donate their embryos? How much are they getting paid? How much concern will a doctor show for the health and safety of a poor homeless woman?

I think that we should consider not only those people who benefit from this procedure (the Duncans), but also those who may be harmed or exploited. I wish that the article delved further into this aspect of the issue...

Probably a little less connection with the issue here, but it does remind me of a brown women physiotherapist I met professionally. During our session,I casually asked her where she is from (and I meant which state in America) and response I got was something like "Oh I look Indian, but I was adopted by white family. So I am white, you see my husband is also white". The only thing I could say was "Congratulations".

Great article/issue to bring to our attention. Just curious though, why would it bother you more if the couple were from Iowa than from Lincolnshire?

I also totally cannot understand why people would "adopt an embryo when there’s plenty of Indian children to adopt." I guess it just has something to do with my worldview -- I also can't understand why people would spend $20K-$50K for fertility treatments and IVF with low chance of success rather than adopt a child of whatever ethnicity. Something about the "parental blood bond" thing (a neurosis I apparently don't have). Maybe gestating and birthing the embryo is seen as the same thing -- a bonding issue that makes the child feel "more yours" than just adopting an infant. I still am militantly pro-adoption.

The price bit is interesting: "The Duncans spent £8,000 on one course of IVF in Britain. Their treatment in Bombay cost £3,000."

I can understand Indian govt being very leery of exploitative "rent-a-womb" with traditional surrogacy, etc., but (and I know I'm opening a can of worms here)... how bad do people feel that egg harvesting is? I know that there are some issues with any person (especially of poorer economic class) being paid for human tissue, whether it be blood, eggs, etc... but isn't egg harvesting minimally invasive, and if a woman can be paid for that, how terrible is it? It's not quite akin on an ethical scale to paying the poor to donate a kidney or half their liver for a price, right? I would almost rather see someone being paid for her eggs rather than being forced to work in a sweatshop (though being forced to select neither option would be best, of course).

This bit seems exaggerated and ridiculous: "British health professionals, meanwhile, fear a rise in multiple births and an added strain on the Health Service." I'm not sure that's really borne out, and they don't really quote any "health professionals" who espouse that view. As someone mentioned, it's not as if millions of people will be taking this option... And if it were really a huge concern about the strain on National Health Service, the govt would have more of a vested interest in creating a policy (which would never happen) limiting the number of children that couples could have, period. Or preventing Catholics from immigrating, or anything similarly stupid. I feel like this "strain on National Health" was thrown into the article as a red herring "con" argument.

My wife and myself are planning to adopt a child from India. The process is LONG and laborious and is restricted to people of Indian origin primarily. Anybody who does not have a trace of Indian ethnicity is 4th down the list(unless you are a celebrity). The process takes 2 years, is expensive and a real pain. So the process to adopt an Indian kid is not as easy as most people think.

is restricted to people of Indian origin primarily. Anybody who does not have a trace of Indian ethnicity is 4th down the list(unless you are a celebrity).

people should stay with their own kind. that's why pure white babies are never adopted out to coloreds, or at least someone with a drop of non-white ancestry.

Is there a doctor in the house? Indian women aren't selling their embryos; they are selling eggs--just like Ivy League-educated American women get paid to do. Presumably, the British couple had an IVF procedure, using an egg from an Indian donor, fertilized by Mr. Duncan's sperm. So the resultant embryo is partially the couple's own genetic creation--but the article doesn't say this. This procedure is very common, and the fact that the eggs happened to have come from a Bombay clinic really isn't that strange.

people should stay with their own kind. that's why pure white babies are never adopted out to coloreds, or at least someone with a drop of non-white ancestry.

Razib, is this your own view, or are you paraphrasing the view of the adoption agencies. If it is your own view, are you for real?

Oh, brother. I know this topic has been discussed in a million places ad nauseam, but.... whatever. Feel free to keep spitting into the wind.

Perhaps the reason the British couple took this route is because technically, they cannot "adopt" an Indian baby. Indian law doesn't allow non-PIOs to adopt children. However, Non-PIOs have to take guardianship of the child to legally take it out of the contry and process the adoption in the parent's country. I don;t know about British law. Does anyone know if parents can bring a foreign baby into the country and adopt the baby? US has a visa called IR-4 that allows couples to bring children into the country and undergo adoption in the US. Does the UK have something like that?

Is there a doctor in the house?

yes. there is.. it's the egg they sell.. just like the ads in the college papers preston..

We've discussed a related issue before, how India is becoming popular for surrogacy. I believe that in some of those cases the ovum is coming from a local source as well.

kusala, i'm parodying. i find the indian government's emphasis on non-immigrant "indian origin" (that is, browns born abroad who weren't born in india) somewhat irritating.

blockquote>So the resultant embryo is partially the couple's own genetic creation--but the article doesn't say this. This procedure is very common, and the fact that the eggs happened to have come from a Bombay clinic really isn't that strange.

You know, this just makes me realise further how this really is a sloppily written article. The fact that she already has a mixed-race child is not a reason for her to be turned down for adoption --- it simply would not happen. There must have been some other reason for this, and the fact that she already has a child may be one reason for her being relegated down the list of suitable applicants. Mentioning that the reason for this was that she had a mixed race child seems like spin to me, of the kind that says, 'political correctness has gone mad'.... The Sunday Times pushes the line of the 'lunacies' of multiculturalism and matters of race, and the angle on this case does seem to be informed excessively by the fact that many white couples will be giving birth to half Indian children if this does become a regular and popular medical procedure.

how bad do people feel that egg harvesting is?

I don't know what the SM zeitgeist on this issue is, but at the risk of being in the minority, I don't see it as being entirely a bad thing. Women in the US get their eggs harvested too. In fact, there were stories about ads in the Harvard newspaper asking Ivy-league educated women to get their eggs harvested for money.

On some level, it's merely a commerical transaction that benefits both parties. It's arguable whether this is totally an arms length transaction though, and that's probably where the ethical gray areas are. Are the women who are coming forward to India mostly middle class women looking to make a few thousand extra rupees? Or is this just another way to exploit the poor female underclass in India?

I had a few friends here in the States who were actually considering being egg donors. They decided not to go through with it, not because of the moral issues but because they apparently would have had to take some hormone treatments that they were uncomfortable with (docs, does that sound plausible?). As long as the Indian donors are actually giving their informed consent to this process, I don't see a problem with it.

At the same time, a person of color has unique barriers growing up. I would hope that any white adopting parents would try to understand those barriers and take them seriously (regardless of the race or national origin of the child). Some of the proud "colorblind" rhetoric I hear coming out of liberal white people would make me cringe if it were coming out of the mouths of parents who adopted a non-white child.

how bad do people feel that egg harvesting is?

Somebody suggested it might be 'minimally invasive'. I don't know myself, but I seem to remember it involves some kind of vacuum suction pump inserted into the wherever which then pulls them out. I don't think it is completely pain-free. Others can elaborate. I doubt, however, if it is as simple as sperm donation, which is the exact male equivalent. I mean, nobody asks about the ethics of that!

Indian law doesn't allow non-PIOs to adopt children

Really? I remember they were talking about a moratorium on foreign adoptions a couple of years ago after the post-tsunami trafficking scandal broke. Did they actually implement it?

AFAIK, a child has to be offered to three Indian families before an overseas desi or a non-Indian can have a go. You used to be able to find all the rules and legal details on the relevant gorrment website. Trafficking concerns are understandable but there's still a lot of knee-jerk suspicion of "foreigners" adopting because, guess what, they are better able to pay to speed up the ridiculously long and bureaucratic procedures you enforce while the child rots in an orphanage losing precious developmental time. And of course the assumption is that you need to double-check foreigners as possible traffickers, but desis would neeevvvver do that, oh no.

There are roadblocks to some desi NRIs adopting India-born children too, fwiw. This isn't much of a concern for 1st and 2nd geners, but a non-US citizen desi who really wants to adopt can't really do it. Citizenship is not a bar to adoption, but the immigration regs do not allow the adopted children to be brought over immediately, unless a citizen is doing the adoption.

There is a lot more xenophobia surrounding foreign adoption these days, and not just in India. Our friends recently adopted two children from Russia, and the agency in Russia told them the children had various non-serious medical complications, which turned out to be completely untrue. Apparently, the agencies in Russia do this so that they can show the local authorities that only the "defective" kids are put up for foreign adoption!

I actually considered "donating" (read = selling) my eggs a few years ago, after I broke my leg and had $$$$ medical bills to pay. Although I had a bid up to $30k for my eggs, I decided not to go through the procedure because while they tell you it's minimally invasive, it can actually be quite painful.

You have to take a series of hormone shots everyday for several months that make you ovulate multiple (20-30) eggs at a time, so your ovaries are working overtime and you're literally bursting with eggs which is supposed to be painful. And then the harvesting procedure involves a large needle that they use to suck those eggs out. OUCH.

What i think is interesting is the process through which they value your eggs. When I went through the initial process, there was a serious lack of Asian (and Jewish) egg donors, so I got a $5k premium just for being asian. Add in another $5k for going to an Ivy League school, another $1,000 for every 100 points over 1400 I got on the SAT, and another $1,000 or so for every IQ point over 130, and you can make some serious cash.

I doubt the donors in India are being adequately compensated for their eggs.

Embryo adoption was the culmination of an 18-year journey for the Duncans during which their attempts to become parents were frustrated by nature and bureaucracy. Being white and already having a mixed-race child (from Mrs Duncan’s previous relationship) meant that they failed the criteria for a normal adoption.

Seriously? Having a mixed-race child limits your chances of adopting in the UK? That’s racist!

No. But having a child limits your chances of adopting in the UK because childless couples are first served.

Like they say, "Ladies, it's not always about you (race)"

>Am I missing something? Why would you want to adopt an Indian embryo
>when there’s plenty of Indian children to adopt?

I think it's the bond created in the first bit of a child's life. The more time a child spends with her mother, especially, the closer the bond. Perhaps the parents want to preserve that, and therefore go the embryo route.

No. But having a child limits your chances of adopting in the UK because childless couples are first served.

Exactly. The mention that the journalist makes of the child being mixed-race is part of the Sunday Times spin I reckon --- either that or very sloppy writing. The way it is makes it seem that the lady is being discriminated against by fiendish piolitical correctness monsters (or that the system is racist) --- the previous would be in line with the Sunday Times' take on British society and race issues generally.

SP # 32

This link here has Some material on relevant rules for adoption by US Citizens, paragraph four talks about India Adoption laws prohibiting adoptions by foreigners.

This is the relevant information on whether foreign adoption is barred in India (from the link in #38).

"In addition, it is important to note that Indian law does not permit foreigners to adopt Indian children, but rather, to receive guardianship (custody) that allows the prospective adoptive parents to depart India with the child and later adopt him/her in the parents’ home country."

Legally speaking, I suppose a foreigner cannot adopt a child in India. But you can formally adopt the same child once you have brought the child back to the UK, US, etc. All you have to do is assume legal guardianship/custody of the child. Not really a prohibition.

...$5k for going to an Ivy League school, another $1,000 for every 100 points over 1400 I got on the SAT, and another $1,000 or so for every IQ point over 130...

Sorry if this sounds dense, but after all this, is there any, ANY concrete proof whatsoever that a high IQ or any other measure of "intelligence" accrues to someone's genetic offspring (or the inverse)?? This type of logic is mind-boggling, but maybe I'm missing some key data...

Legally speaking, I suppose a foreigner cannot adopt a child in India. But you can formally adopt the same child once you have brought the child back to the UK, US, etc. All you have to do is assume legal guardianship/custody of the child. Not really a prohibition.

It really depends on the parent's country of citizensip. If a country doesn't allow bringing a foreign child into the country, and doesn't process the adoption of a foreign child, then there is no way citizens of that country can adopt an Indian child. Fortunately, the US allows citizens, using the IR-4 visa, to bring foreign orphans into the country and process adoption in the US legal system. So, it might be difficult for US citizens to adopt Indian children, it's not impossible. If the US were to stop giving IR-4 visas, then it would be impossible for Americans to adopt Indians.

I don't know what the relevant law in UK is. DOes the UK allow citizens to tak guardianship of Indian children and bring them into the UK?. Depending on how the UK law is written, it may be impossible for British citizens to adopt Indian children.

kusla at 19.

I also totally cannot understand why people would "adopt an embryo when there’s plenty of Indian children to adopt." I guess it just has something to do with my worldview -- I also can't understand why people would spend $20K-$50K for fertility treatments and IVF with low chance of success rather than adopt a child of whatever ethnicity. Something about the "parental blood bond" thing (a neurosis I apparently don't have). Maybe gestating and birthing the embryo is seen as the same thing -- a bonding issue that makes the child feel "more yours" than just adopting an infant. I still am militantly pro-adoption.

Stevie at 36. I

think it's the bond created in the first bit of a child's life. The more time a child spends with her mother, especially, the closer the bond. Perhaps the parents want to preserve that, and therefore go the embryo route.

Politics aside, I can offer with certainty that the process and the chemistry of pregnancy totally direct the mother's ability and inclination to bond. Probably something similar goes on with the child within. Chickens being easy types to study for dance and psychology both, it has been determined long since that hens mutter and cluck and croon to their chicks during hatching, which fact is now commonly used as the basis for diabolical experimentation used to study attachment. I can swear to it that my kids let me know how they were feeling at all times, causing me to respond so as to normalize things that were bothering them/ When I was housing my first, I only became aware of this kind of communication after being four months into it-- i.e., there's learning involved. So, yes, I think in terms of bonding and knowing and stuff it's better to adopt an embryo than a baby.

This is bizarre! The fact that there is a clinic selling embryos should cause the imbroglio not issues of race, finances and Indian laws regarding adoption.
Having lived in India for over 20 years, I should not surprised, in India, human life has no value. By this, they have simply reached a new low.

in India, human life has no value

I first heard this in America!

to normalize things that were bothering them/

--that's normalize/rectify out of kilter things, like loud noises, sudden movement, the way I was sitting ad much else-- an onging thing. Swear.

Pagla:

You're right. The law is permissive, only as long as the parents' country allows formal adoption of foreign children.

I hadn't considered the possibility that the UK might have laws or regulations that bar assuming custody of a foreign child and then adopting that child formally in the UK.

Naina,

In case you did not know it already, the doc who administered the IVF/Embryo-donor treatment (Times article), has a blog.

I actually considered "donating" (read = selling) my eggs a few years ago, after I broke my leg and had $$$$ medical bills to pay. Although I had a bid up to $30k for my eggs, I decided not to go through the procedure because while they tell you it's minimally invasive, it can actually be quite painful.

It wouldn't have bothered you knowing that your biological children were out there somewhere, living their lives, with no connection to you whatsoever? You wouldn't even know any details about them? But yet they'd still be YOUR kids after all, regardless. This is one aspect of egg/sperm donation that I just can't relate to. It would drive me crazy knowing I had a son/daughter out there and I had no contact with them.

This is bizarre! The fact that there is a clinic selling embryos should cause the imbroglio not issues of race, finances and Indian laws regarding adoption.
Having lived in India for over 20 years, I should not surprised, in India, human life has no value. By this, they have simply reached a new low.

Clearly, an exaggerated mail that came from having misunderstood the topic. For more info, please read up on Virginia Postrel's blog for extensive details on her drive to make paid kidney donations legal. Her blog has links to her articles in reputed publications.

..oh, and Postrel practised what she said. She donated her own kidney to another blogger.

It would drive me crazy knowing I had a son/daughter out there and I had no contact with them.

This guy tried.

Re adopting from India...

There seem to be many misconceptions to adopting from India. I'm very involved in a group of people here in the bay area who have adopted or are in the process of adopting from India....

* Like all aspects of Indian life, there is a quota system in adoption. Yes, it is true that each baby in an Indian orphanage must be first "offered" to a desi couple in India, then a desi couple abroad, then a mixed desi/non-desi couple (my category), and then a firang couple. However, all of this said, if you are willing to proactive (willing to consider any orphanage with an international license) and be agressive (for example, call the orphanage every week), be willing to accept a baby with a darker skin (which many many indians are not willing to), not specify that you will only accept a baby boy, etc. etc. you will experience a much shorter wait period than 2 years. The more open you show yourself to be and the more assertive you are, the quicker you will get a referral. Age is one barrier that is pretty much impossible to get around in terms of India adoptions. Other than this, you can work thru any others.

* It is true of pretty much any Western country not just the US, that to adopt from another country, you MUST be a citizen of the country you are currently residing in. For example, if you are British and living in the US, then you must start and complete the adoption in the UK.

* Single women can adopt from India but single men cannot (totally idiotic rule but then when has India been logical about stuff). I know several white and desi-orgin women who have adopted singlely and one of them is on her 2nd adoption from India...again, they have not been hung up on the color of the skin of the baby or wanted a 3-month old infant only or a boy only.

sp

I think in terms of bonding and knowing and stuff it's better to adopt an embryo than a baby

Amrita, I have no doubt that what you're saying is true (yes, having a baby grow inside you for nine months would definitely bond you and make you "aware" of its needs/presence).... However, would you honestly say that if you adopted a child in addition to the one(s) you had given birth to, you wouldn't feel as close to the adoptee? I guess anecdotes like yours just seem to perpetuate the idea that it's "not as special" to adopt an infant as having your own. I just think if couples have a fertility problem, the idea of spending tens of thousands of dollars for IVF is a bunch of bollocks. Also, I think even a lot of men feel like they want "their own" biological progeny, rather than adopting... and for them it's not about the physical bond of pregnancy, obviously. I guess I'm just curious about this because I don't personally have this compelling URGE to have a child who must be the product of my own genetic material. Similarly, I don't relate to Amitabh's anxiety at the thought of potential offspring running around unbeknownst to him -- I just don't have that obsession with ownership of my chromosomes!!

One more thing on adoption...

Under the Hindu code, ONLY Hindus are permitted to adopt children in India. All others (Sikhs, Muslims, Christians, firangis, etc.) can assume guardianship in the Indian family courts. What this means as a foreigner or non-Hindu NRI is that one needs to file paperwork for an adoption in in your own country.

I believe they are working to change this in India but no one knows when this will happen.

sp

We've discussed a related issue before, how India is becoming popular for surrogacy.

Surrogacy, or the outsourcing of pregnancy, is probably the way things will go. There are plenty indians who already sell one of their kidneys just to survive, so finding desi women who are willing to rent out their wombs to westerners who either are unable to have children on their own, or do not want to go through the bother of pregnancy, should be easy and affordable.

BTW, since desis are so in awe of light skin, why isn't the reverse taking place? Why aren't indian women lining up to get impregnated with donated or sold semen from white men? I am sure many a white tourist in India can be talked into donating his sperm, or selling it cheap, to help out indians in their desperate quest for fairness.

be willing to accept a baby with a darker skin (which many many indians are not willing to), not specify that you will only accept a baby boy

Amrita

I think in terms of bonding and knowing and stuff it's better to adopt an embryo than a baby

I think this is totally hogwash. Even if you have had bio kids and adopted kids, and this was true to your personal experience, it would be true to you only. To extrapolate a universal truth from your own experience is silly to say the least.

sp

To extrapolate a universal truth from your own experience is silly to say the least.

Neale

Sonya, People (re educated indian in usa) actually worry about this? Jeez.

I have found the NRI educated crowd in the US to be extremely parochial and narrow minded particularly in terms of skin color. I have had several inappropriate comments about my daughter which clearly indicate the value desis put on skin color. My daughter (who was adopted from India) is on the lighter side and is very very pretty (we get stopped in our downtown constantly by goras telling us or her how gorgeous she is). Couple of people have gone so far as to say that if they could find a child as pretty as my daughter, they would surely adopt! but, the sad thing is that they don't realize all babies develop into gorgeous beings if you can see past their skin color, lack of hair, or health.

sp

how about childless indian couples in india adopting gora kids. something tells me that will NEVER happen.

factoring in obvious power asymmetries is a not a chatterati strongpoint.

"I have found the NRI educated crowd in the US to be extremely parochial and narrow minded particularly in terms of skin color."

Ditto what Sonya said; opposite reasons (darker skinned child). Often asked directly or indirectly whether we saw/chose our child before adopting.

Sonya, thanks for taking the time to clarify the misconceptions. It's nice to have another adoptive parent on here when these topics arise. You often say what I'm thinking before I have the opportunity to type.

Preston, Indian women ARE selling their eggs, but embryo adoption is something different. When a couple undergoes ovarian stimulation to harvest eggs for IVF, oftentimes more viable embryos are produced in the lab than are implanted in the woman's uterus. Some couples choose to freeze the extras for future IVF attempts, some choose to have the destroyed, and some choose to donate them for other infertile couples to use. The last of these is considered embryo adoption.

Many couples want to give birth. We chose to give life. We adopted a six-month old from an orphanage in Kolkata. She was probably born on the streets of the City of Joy and turned in to the orphanage by a destitute birth mother with no ability to raise a child. Today this baby is a 14-year old Floridian - beautiful gal, a talented singer with a budding soprano voice, one of the most popular kids in school because of her genuine regard for other human beings, and much to the delight of us old fashioned desis, a straight A student.

Who needs embryos!

Floridian (#62). Thats a beautiful story.

This lends further credence to the notion that Indians will take over the world by out-breeding all other races. Now that we've started commandeering the wombs of other races, we can't be stopped!

I don't have a kid, nor am I trying to have one. I assume if there are legal barriers to adoption, then this is one really slick way around it. Imagine getting your uterus searched after flying back from India. hah!

Wow, that's terrific, Floridian! I always said that I'd adopt kids when I got older and more secure in life.

With enlightened and articulate Uncles and Aunties like us, the child is safe.

Flordian,

Great story.

Who needs embryos!

Lots of parents who have plenty of love to give :-).
The adoption process as you well know, is very difficult in most countries and often more expensive than the embryo option.

totally unrelated by the rupee is gaing against the dollar. Isn't this the first time in years?

doesn't bother me ... the can't adopt cause they already had a mixed race child is weird one!! any thoughts on why that rule came into being?

i would like to sell my eggs..but i dont have any. I gave them away last year for a ps3 and a 6pack of bud

I am tempted to ask this question: So what will bubble will the child fill in on the standardized tests? White because she was born to white parents or "Asian" because she is really the product of an Indian?

#55 - LOL! Nope, I think most desis want to get as light as they can within their own community, or maybe a closely related one, but mixing blood with firangs is still slightly frowned upon among all but the more liberal urban elites.

Sonya, thanks for the details on adoption. You said age was one barrier, what's the upper age limit? I plan to adopt and should get cracking I suppose.

Agree with you (and the others) on one thing.. there are so many babies to adopt!!

"Sonya, thanks for the details on adoption. You said age was one barrier, what's the upper age limit?"

Sonya, I would like to hear your answer, but if I may add my two cents. The upper age limit, as far as I can remember from our adoption process 14 years ago, is pegged to the age of the child you wish to adopt. If you want to adopt an infant, I believe 46 is the limit. If you want to adopt a teenager, the limit might be higher. It stands to reason, because what the authorities want to ensure is your future physical ability to raise the child until he or she becomes an adult.

The adoption process, incidentally, does not confer special privileges to NRI's wanting to adopt from India, even if they wanted to adopt a relative. You have to still contend with the laws of two countries - the US and India. I remember we had to take US citizenship rather than remain green card holders forever because US laws required us to be citizens to bring a foreign born baby into the country as an adopted child and then be able to file for US citizenship for the child. On the Indian side, there are laws governing the transportation of an Indian born child to a foreign country.

As cumbersome as this process sounds, there are adoption agencies that facilitate the entire process, right down to coordinating with the Indian laws and Indian orphanages. Their fees were well under $10,000 beack in 1992.

I was surprised at somebody's comment regarding the difficulty faced by white parents wanting to adopt Indian babies. My recollection is that the laws were color and nationality neutral on the adoption issue.

Floridian, IIRC the adoption agencies that charged fees were identified as part of the problem leading to trafficking when the scandal erupted a couple of years ago. Essentially, agencies in the south were buying babies off poor families because they could charge a fair amount (even if it's not *that* much by US standards) to foreign adopting families for a "quick" adoption of a young baby. Not that I blame people for wanting to get through cumbersome bureaucratic procedures as quickly as possible so that they can start caring for their child, but that's beside the point. I don't know if the rogue agencies were in any way representative, but the alarm was raised, and there were lots of articles in Outlook and in the Hindu, I think, about the responsibility of the Indian state in this regard.

Re; Kusala -- i agree, i think it's scary and a load of (@*$ to be selecting for traits in that fashion. i was more trying to show people the types of things that egg farms will do; all it reflects is that i had good SAT prep and got lucky on an IQ test. what it also reflects is that indian donors might be undercompensated because they don't have some 'paper qualification's that i had driving the prices of my eggs up.

i was frankly quite shocked at the type of information they requested, and even more suprised when i watched the price for my eggs increase with every question i answered.

in regards to the ethical issues behind having a child out there that i didn't know about... i did consider this. you might even say it's like missing a limb! ironically, at the time i had just had a very bad accident and i had three orthopaedic surgeons recommending to amputate my leg, while one other surgeon was willing to try something experimental to save it. unfortunately, insurance doesn't cover experimental procedures, and i couldn't think of any other way to raise the $$$ (about $80k). in this case, it was deciding between losing a real limb and a hypothetical child. i'm not sure anyone would be able to make a rational decision in those circumstances.

the nyt had an interesting article yesterday about sperm donors contacting their children after many years. it seems most of the issues are on the side of the child, who looks for their missing genetic parent.

I also totally cannot understand why people would "adopt an embryo when there’s plenty of Indian children to adopt."

Sonia - thanks for touching upon all the hurdles surrounding adoption in India. I am currently living in Bangalore and have some friends here who are expats from Germany. This is a couple who had been trying desperately to have children through numerous failed IVF treatments both in Germany and here in India. Because of the trauma surrounding repeated failed attempts, they finally made the decision to look into adopting an Indian child, and MY GOD! There are so many rules surrounding this, and as foreign expats they were absolutely last on the todem pole for adopting a child. The other option posed to them was implantation of an Indian embryo - NOT an Indian woman's egg inseminated by the male in the couple's sperm.

I heard a call for a doctor. I'm not a fertility specialist, but I'll use my general medical knowledge to try and fill in the gaps... Apparently, as more and more Indian couples are trying to conceive using IVF, there are many frozen embryos which go unimplanted into the mother's womb. The way the treatment works is that initially, the woman's ovaries are stimulated with various hormonal meds. Eggs are harvested and inseminated with the male's semen in vitro. Subsequently numerous embryos are created. Because of the high probablility of genetic abnormalities leading to embryo's which are non-viable in the womb, usually several are implanted into the woman's uterus. Others may be frozen for future attempts at implantation. Though if lucky, one embryo will successfully implant leading to pregnancy for the couple. Sometimes couples may decide to not proceed with implantation, or in the case of successful pregnancies, at times numerous embryos that weren't implanted will be remaining. This has resulted in EMBRYOS which are "left behind." Some couples will allow them to be donated for implantation in another woman's womb. This appears to be the case in the couple this article discusses.

Going back to the German couple I was talking about - well they gave IVF one last shot... and the wife is pregnant! The due date for the happy couple is in September...

Seriously? Having a mixed-race child limits your chances of adopting in the UK? That’s racist!

Naina, I must commend you on channelling Angry Asian Man!

how about childless indian couples in india adopting gora kids. something tells me that will NEVER happen.

Better yet - how about every Indian couple (living in India) adopting just one homeless, street or orphaned kid in India?

That would solve alot of issues and help alot of kids.

Mass propaganda should be spread for this.

Some here seem to be annoyed that demands of "quality" should be made on the good donors. That perhaps these manifestations of "quality" (SATS, etc.) are not to be taken seriously. I tend to agree, but then I imagine shopping....
And if you, dear shopper, were scanning the sperm donor selections, turning the pages of the catalog, and your eye had been caught by the fetching good looks of one on offer, wouldn't the addition of an engineering Ph.D., awards for community service, and a propensity for keeping his room neat, have more appeal than someone who....oh, fill in the blanks with whatever traits turn you off the most. You get the idea. After all, you're going to be living with the kid for a long time.
Hard-boiled reality: egg & sperm banks are for-profit and customer driven, and it is their business to know heredity to the extent possible with the current science. The brain is just another organ after all. People can inherit personality traits, or else I am delusional. You've never seen a kid who is "just like" that dad he never knew, or that grandmother who died before the kid was born? OTOH, the kid could be an original, like nobody in the bio-family. It's a roll of the dice, but it seems to me, the dice are loaded.
SATs sure don't measure one's worth as a person, (much less iq) but one doesn't really score high by "getting lucky" on them. Luck is not statistically significant on such tests. They do, however, push outrage buttons because they are held to tell more about someone than seems possible or fair. They measure speed of synapsis perhaps--the way one processes information, figures stuff out. If the person comes from a rather un-enhanced background, a high mark is more remarkable. However, in and of itself, a high SAT (or iq), does not guarantee success for an individual, nor do they guarantee good character traits. They don't necessarily even make an interesting conversationalist, though they seem to help.
Ideally, people choose the father or mother of their future children with at least some consideration of character and mentality. Most in the "West" choose based on fleeting physical attraction, but I digress.
Adoption of already born kids, whose bio-parents are already a done deal, is a different issue, but one which offers some useful information.
My brother and his wife have one son born to them, and several adopted kids. The bio-family of two of the adopted kids was abusive and was actually ordered by the state not to produce more kids, which of course they violated. Social services called my sister-in-law on an emergency basis, to take the newborn. Later they decided to adopt the baby's older sister. So began my brother and sister-in-law's second family.
They are close and bonded, but the adopted kids have another whole dimension going on there. Three have learning problems, but my sister in law and brother are patient and encourage their strong points, so the kids are doing great. The two bio-siblings have a special bond, even when they are at odds. They have these wonderful parents who chose them, and who have devoted a major part of their lives and resources to them, but nobody is doing anybody a favor--it's a labor of love and kismet, not condescension. These particular people are just meant to have a "complex" sort of family, and to be together.
What is important to my brother and sister-in-law is that the kids grow up healthy, continue to be kind, decent people and use the brains they've got to their best advantage. The statistical probability is that, once they reach young adulthood, their behavior and choices will start to more closely resemble those of their bio-parents than those of their adopto-parents. In the end, it's their lives and their choices. I think this is a case where nuture trumps nature. If not, their parents will love them anyway. After all, they're their kids.

Have the americans started adopting iraqi children yet? All those poor unloved iraqi children roaming the streets of baghdad. What is wrong with those Iraqis? Are they hopelessly depraved or what?

sohwhat,

"so I got a $5k premium just for being asian. Add in another $5k for going to an Ivy League school, another $1,000 for every 100 points over 1400 I got on the SAT, and another $1,000 or so for every IQ point over 130, and you can make some serious cash."

I really hope "Ivy league" wasn't the exact terminology used in the terms of payment. I don't understand how anyone in their right minds can place Brown anywhere near the realm of MIT, Caltech, Stanford, etc. Secondly, "$1,000 for every 100 points over 1400" and "$1,000 or so for every IQ point over 130" do not reconcile with each other very well. By those figures, a 1600 is worth only $2,000 whereas a 140 (which should be a piece of cake to earn for most 1600-ers) is worth $10,000. Are you sure you didn't mean $1,000 for every 10 IQ points? I know quite a few people with 173+ IQs who would be thrilled at the prospects.

Personally, I think attractiveness is underrated in clinics and by academics in general. The underrepresentation of the (naturally) beautiful among doctors and academes lends to a severe bias against attractiveness. Coupled with the prevalent fatigue-factor among the learned over having to witness beauty being overvalued in pop-culture, the bias is understandable. I still somehow feel that a tier-1 model is worth as much if not more than a tier-1 scientist. Unless we're suddenly talking about male models, because male models are clearly inferior to scientists :)

how about childless indian couples in india adopting gora kids. something tells me that will NEVER happen.

I know of a desi family that adopted a white kid. Of course this is in the US.

Amrita, I have no doubt that what you're saying is true (yes, having a baby grow inside you for nine months would definitely bond you and make you "aware" of its needs/presence).... However, would you honestly say that if you adopted a child in addition to the one(s) you had given birth to, you wouldn't feel as close to the adoptee? I guess anecdotes like yours just seem to perpetuate the idea that it's "not as special" to adopt an infant as having your own. I just think if couples have a fertility problem, the idea of spending tens of thousands of dollars for IVF is a bunch of bollocks. Also, I think even a lot of men feel like they want "their own" biological progeny, rather than adopting... and for them it's not about the physical bond of pregnancy, obviously. I guess I'm just curious about this because I don't personally have this compelling URGE to have a child who must be the product of my own genetic material. Similarly, I don't relate to Amitabh's anxiety at the thought of potential offspring running around unbeknownst to him -- I just don't have that obsession with ownership of my chromosomes!!

hey,kusala, first you get that pregnancy is helpful for the bonding process, but then you get all worked up about a comparison with adoption, and even what you identify as the need to own one's chromosomes-- which last, BTW, is completely irrelevant when you bear an adopted embryo to term. Sure, you can bond without pregnancy, and love unreservedly without pregnancy-- but I'm pretty sure from watching my great-aunt and my friends who have adopted babies and adopted teens that bonding is a different process at each stage of a embryo-baby-child's development. You can have a lousy birth mother just as you can have a wonderful adopting mother-- there are many mediating factors,.

I think this is totally hogwash. Even if you have had bio kids and adopted kids, and this was true to your personal experience, it would be true to you only. To extrapolate a universal truth from your own experience is silly to say the least.

I wasn't extrapolating anything from my experience alone, Sonya, and no, I haven't adopted kids to make a comparison-- and in fact I wasn't making one. That is entirely in your imagination! Like I said, chickens and other avian species are also known to create bonding and coordination among their brood through vocalizations while hatching eggs. Most researchers in this area of biology/behavior operate on the understanding that it's more than likely that most species engage in prenatal mother-infant communication, since this is observed in birds as well as mammals, including humans and other apes and simian species. What I AM saying is that things go on during gestation that are helpful to the mother in learning about parenting-- why not wait until you've been through the chemical changes of pregnancy before calling this hogwash.

adoptive, not adopting.

Why would you want to adopt an Indian embryo when there’s plenty of Indian children to adopt?

Better neonatal care to prevent all sorts of early environmental insults (pathogens, to name one example) -- not a small concern if the baby were born in South Asia.