2015 concluded on a note of hope – hope for greater respect for our planet, hope for a more united world through the adoption of the SDGs, hope for a better protection of children in a vulnerable situation, including children without family care. 2016 has now begun, and with it, time has come for the realisation of these aims.

The 2015 Special Commission on the operation of the HC-1993 confirmed it: given the changing landscape of intercountry adoption (ICA), accredited adoption bodies (AABs) face important difficulties in many Contracting States, often linked to their funding sources, and which jeopardise their survival and their activities in accordance with international standards.

Since its creation, the ISS/IRC, together with other actors, has fought illegal practices carried out in the context of adoption, through the implementation of an adequate international legal framework and the development of training and information tools aimed at preventing these practices and at remedying what may be irreparable.

It has become a recurrent scenario over recent years for receiving countries to see a drastic decline in intercountry adoptions, all too often this is perceived as inevitable but could it perhaps be seen as an opportunity for these countries to review their priorities?

When communication, in its most varied manifestations, is used for the benefit of adoption issues, a multitude of paths open up expressing the deeper meaning of adoption beyond words and numbers, and help to make the unspoken evident, as this can be a source of much suffering.

When determining the best interests of the child, long-term considerations – as essential foundations providing perspective, sustainability and an identity beyond childhood – are too often ignored.

The implementation of international standards of children’s rights in adoption has always been a delicate balance of competing interests – the principle of double subsidiarity is no exception.

Whilst cultural prejudices and discrimination in adoption remain sensitive, complex and taboo aspects of the process, what is their impact on adoptees, biological and adoptive families, as well as other actors involved?

Whilst the 2015 intercountry adoption numbers continue to reflect the trend initiated in 2005, a series of recent research contributes to offering a new perspective on these data and on those relating to alternative care.

Questions concerning State spending have always involved a fine and sometimes divisive balance of competing interests, especially with widespread austerity measures in place. How can we ensure prosperity in the field of alternative care and adoption through effective budgetary planning?

A country may have an ‘ideal’ legal framework available for children in need of protection but if, at the same time, the professionals responsible for putting this into effect are not qualified and supported in carrying out their functions, it will remain unworkable.

Further to current issues being raised by the adoption of children by superstars, ISS wishes to recall the basic ethical and international standards which should safeguard the rights of the adopted child. ISS would like to ensure that all adoptions are “super” for the child. Superstars are in a unique position to reflect (or not) ethical practices, leading by example.

Our globalised world has increasingly facilitated transnational mobility and free movement of workers. By 2017, global numbers are estimated to reach 56.8 million expatriates1. Expatriates are generally individuals living in a country other than their country of citizenship for various reasons (work, volunteering, education, etc.), often for a limited amount of time. Such work expatriations can create opportunities and challenges related to the private family sphere, including adoption issues. The ISS/IRC does not question the validity of every ‘expatriate adoption’, yet invites all actors to prevent and address the inherent risks linked to such adoptions when they arise.

In addition to the child’s status in relation to his or her migration situation or to that of his or her relatives, the focus of the professionals, States and the public at large should be on the child as an individual and on the fulfilment of his or her rights: are we facing here an impossible mission?

Debates concerning surrogacy, in particular international arrangements, have been wide ranging – from demands for complete prohibition to widest possible permission, and in between, a call for regulation. ISS centres its position on the need to prioritise the protection of the child, whatever the position.

Kafalah, which has been recognised by the UNCRC, raises complex and sensitive issues as to its forms and the safeguards that are linked to its implementation – in particular when it is of an international character.

Can returning to the fundamentals of human dignity help us navigate through the myriad of competing interests to ensure that we cultivate a child-rights approach to questions of nationality in alternative care, adoption and international surrogacy arrangements to prevent statelessness?

Before being classified as ‘a child with special needs’, because of a difficult family history, an insecure childhood, or a disability, a child is a human being and must always be seen as such, with his strengths and vulnerabilities, someone who is capable of having a happy life, if he or she is given the means to this end.

The Monthly Review, which has given worldwide visibility to ISS’s International Reference Centre, is celebrating 20 years of existence this year.

In this end-of-year period, the SSI/CIR is proud to present a new publication relating to intercountry adoption breakdowns, aimed at offering support to adoptees, adoptive parents, professionals from Central Authorities and other competent authorities, and accredited adoption bodies, in order to prevent and manage crisis, and even breakdowns, faced by adoptive families.

The number of digital tools is ever increasing and transforming the daily life of professionals, children and families. At the start of this year, the SSI/IRC is looking into whether professionals and users have the appropriate training and education in the use of these new technologies, and of the risks involved.

Adoption and the protection of children without a family or at risk of so being are, sometimes, very controversial fields, given the personal and collective values at stake. The ideological positions and various interests in the backdrop make it complex – sometimes even jeopardise – what should be the ‘child’s best interests’.

This Editorial by Nigel Cantwell1, argues that undertaking intercountry adoptions in certain contexts can constitute ‘forced migration’2, and can lead to illegal adoptions.

Each of the procedural steps of the 1993 Hague Convention, including the agreement that the adoption may proceed as established in Article 17 c), has its importance in the implementation of adoptions, which respect the unique needs of children, and their rights, which, like those of the prospective adoptive parents, are recognised.

The resort to DNA testing in an adoption process may be beneficial in specific cases, but it is a risk to resort to such tests systematically, for example, in order to confirm or ensure the validity and ethics of intercountry adoption procedures.

‘Recognising that the child, for the full and harmonious development of his or her personality, should grow up in a family environment, in an atmosphere of happiness, love and understanding’ (Preamble of the UNCRC): Does this not create a strong incentive to be advocating for a family for all children in all circumstances?

The first name given to a child is integral to their identity, and reflects a part of their story, to a greater or lesser extent – depending, for example, on the age of the child. Changing it when they are adopted is therefore not a trivial issue, and is a cause for debate at several levels.

In 2018, the ISS/IRC carried out its annual compilation of statistics relating to the number of intercountry adoptions undertaken during the previous year; but what do these figures imply in terms of actions for protection and cooperation?

As it marks its 25th anniversary, the ISS/IRC would like to express its warm thanks for the loyalty and trust shown by Central Authorities and all partners, who have supported it from the start, or more recently.