Inherently Unequal: Power Relations in Transnational Adoptions
- Logan
- Sep 7, 2025
- 8 min read
Updated: Nov 24, 2025
Transnational adoption is typically framed as a beautiful interaction that provides a child with innumerable opportunities and benefits they otherwise would not have been able to access in their birth country. However, the exchange also perpetuates problematic global dynamics that are less frequently discussed. The media has continuously hailed celebrities like Madonna and Angelina Jolie as courageous and generous, glorifying their adoptions. What is missing from these discussions is an open and honest confrontation of the realities created by transnational adoptions, particularly those between the United States and developing countries. While it is true that transcontinental adoption can be a wonderful, life-saving event, it is equally true that systemic patterns and hierarchies are maintained through this dynamic, and they must be addressed. Transnational adoptions create an inherent power differentiation between the sending and receiving countries, predicated on political socio-economic factors; however, these dynamics can be mitigated and slowly dismantled over time.
Power differentiation is exerted through political involvement on behalf of the United States, which has both social and economic ramifications for the affected country. The case of Guatemala is a prime example of power exertion by the U.S. that culminated in devastating social and economic effects. Guatemala experienced brutal intercountry violence and civil war, which led to U.S. involvement through a coup. Democratically elected president Jacobo Árbenz was overthrown, and the military dictator Carlos Castillo Armas was installed. This U.S.-backed authoritative coup is evidence that power relations between Guatemala and the U.S. permitted such drastic interference, clearly predicated on U.S. anti-communist interests and the desire to exert and maintain hegemonic control.
As social and political protests grew in Guatemala, indigenous peoples were targeted by military forces, causing countless children to go missing. According to the country’s truth commission, the disappearance of children was considered “ a tactic of war”. Marre and
Briggs (2009) frames adoption as an index of vulnerability, an idea that is clearly demonstrated by the exploitation of children that occurred in the subsequent years. By 2006, Guatemala had the highest per capita rate of adoption in the world, with most adoptions facilitated by private agencies and adopters primarily from the U.S. and Europe, where high fees were paid despite minimal legal requirements (Blum, 2015). It is here that the line between adoption and child trafficking becomes blurred, and the country lost agency over crucial decisions as the U.S.-backed dictator sparked hysteria and widespread violence.
Guatemala fell into the global trend of neoliberalism supported by the U.S., and as a result, the commodification of babies promoted buying and stealing children as well as “pregnancies for hire” (Blum, 2015, p. 172). Rumors such as “...children who disappear across borders [were] being raped and murdered by abusive adoptive parents or maimed and dismembered so their organs [could] be utilized by the rich for transplants is a telling metaphor for the unequal power relations that shape adoption” (Marre and Briggs, 2009, p. 136). A growing trend of humanitarian rescue continued to grow as child refugee migration increased within the U.S., along with child rescue campaigns. The demand for babies in the U.S. was filled by Guatemala, resulting in hindered development at Guatemala’s expense—a direct exertion of power and domination. Unfortunately, Guatemala is not the only foreign country that has been exposed to economic liberalism and privatization. In South Korea, single mothers are stigmatized, and the country lacks comprehensive welfare programs and agencies to help mitigate poverty. Neoliberal strategies recommend reducing welfare to decrease government involvement and costs. This causes negative effects on birth mothers and their children (Högbacka, 2008). As a result, transnational adoptions in South Korea continue to be promoted as the solution to failing government structures and deficient institutions.
Neoliberal adjustments instigated by the U.S. have resulted in the propagation of capitalism as an overarching system in many countries. According to Patton-Imani (2012), this capitalist tension has led people to pay high prices to adopt children from developing countries. As this method of adoption was popularized, “narratives about orphan salvation have intensified with the need to divert attention from the crass consumerism” that the global adoption system has accepted (Patton-Imani, 2012, p. 302). These narratives, which attempt to validate transnational adoption as ethical and moral in the eyes of the receiving country, help to reaffirm the existing functionality of hierarchy. Political socio-economic influences responsible for unequal power relations are particularly pervasive because they are translated into discourse through language and media content.
Power differentiation is reaffirmed through the language and media used to represent transnational adoptions. How people speak of translational adoption influences perception and reinforces certain behaviors. Over time, this results in the normalization of particular patterns and ways of thinking. According to Marre and Briggs (2009), “Public discourses tend to position adopted children as objects of market transactions, which they see as imposed by Western capitalist countries” (p. 136). In effect, the process of exchanging fees for a child can easily be construed as purchasing a child, especially as Western countries generally purport the merits of capitalism and encourage other countries to follow suit. However, this transactional relationship makes many people uncomfortable, especially adoptive parents and potential adoptive parents, as they struggle with the reality that such an arrangement is rooted in unequal power dynamics.
To remedy this uncomfortable contradiction, various narratives are created. One common narrative is “the white savior”. Holt International Adoption Agency is an excellent example of this idea in action. Transnational adoption from Asia began in the 1950s from Korea, following the Korean War. War orphans were adopted by Harry and Bertha Holt, who attempted to “save” children through their rescue mission called the Holt International Adoption Agency. “They narrated a public story that equated the salvation of orphans with Christian family values and patriotic citizenship in the Cold War era” (Patton-Imani, 2012, p. 294). This salvation narrative has pervaded the public perception of transnational adoption today, which can be witnessed in both religious and non-religious contexts. Indeed, many adoption organizations today maintain a Christian mission that directly relates to the history of missionaries designated to “save natives” through conversion. (Patton-Imani, 2012).
Orphan Sunday is also an example of a modern campaign that silences birth mothers and their stories and casts children as orphans who need to be “saved” by two-parent heterosexual Christian families. (Patton-Imani, 2012). As Patton-Imani (2012) describes, “salvation narratives obscure attention to the role of state power in shaping the circumstances that lead to child relinquishment in countries with high poverty rates, and adoption by primarily white middle‐class married couples in the United States and other western countries” (p. 295). By casting these children as desperately in need of assistance, the voices of their mothers, who often gave birth in poverty and oppressive environments, are silenced. The ability to tell stories is a form of power because the storyteller is able to shape public perception on a given issue. Power relations are directly applicable because the stories of transnational adoptions are most often created by white middle-class adoptive families or adoption agencies, which target a specific audience while simultaneously abandoning pieces of the story that do not fit neatly in their context.
Celebrities are also influential in controlling adoption narratives due to their status, wealth, and reputation. For example, Madonna adopted her son David from Malawi in 2006. Many consider the adoption to be an act of white saviorism. David, who was initially described by Madonna and the media as an orphan, is in fact not an orphan—his biological Dad lives in Malawi without the proper resources to care for him. This mischaracterization, sensationalized by the media, encourages white saviorism to continue by implying that David needed to be saved and promoting a white Western woman as his savior. Due to her popularity, the “Madonna effect” has been noted, which is described as an increase in transnational adoptions that occurred after she adopted David. The media posits women like Madonna as the “ideal mother” and alleges adoption to be the universal solution without addressing larger systemic issues (Bell, 2013). Discourse and its many forms of expression hold power in framing and maintaining discrepancies in power; however, these hegemonic configurations can be slowly dismantled.
While the complex interconnection of social, political, and economic relations between the U.S. and other countries may seem difficult to disrupt, some valid strategies can help reduce discrepancies in power and autonomy. Perhaps the most obvious solution is to address the root causes of transnational adoption. While unequivocal, this explanation is highly individualized to each country. While poverty, economic downturn, and women’s rights are all typical commonalities among many sending countries, these factors are not comprehensive and manifest differently due to cultural variance. Thus, it is impossible to develop a “one size fits all” model, and instead, improvements must come from within each nation, as they are in the best position to decide what will work for them. Without further research into the specifics of each country, it is impossible to offer realistic suggestions. Furthermore, a larger debate as to whether white Western countries such as the U.S. even have a role to play in mitigating poverty when they have historically been contributors to its existence. Leaving aside large systemic reforms, there are still measures within the U.S. that can be taken to disrupt discrepancies in power.
One change that requires little financial devotion is a shift in language. Primarily, this occurs through empowering the birth mother's voice within discourse. Laws, policies, and social institutions can greatly benefit from including these individuals. It is necessary to understand how these structures work to define some mothers and families as legitimate while casting others as illegitimate. Involving birth mothers’ voices not only arms the adoptee with more information about their background by providing a crucial link, but it also reforms many laws and policies in which their side of the story is intentionally silenced. This silencing permits the propagation of narratives like the white savior complex and denies other perspectives from surfacing (Patton-Imani, 2012). Intersectionality is also important to emphasize in public discourse, which brings attention to how gender, race, ethnicity, culture, socioeconomic status, sexual orientation, gender identity, and other salient characteristics influence power relations (Patton-Imani, 2012).
Another salient suggestion originates from Dorow (2002), which suggests studying adoption as a global ethnography to better demonstrate complex interrelated relationships. As previously mentioned, narratives like “the white savior” tend to oversimplify stories and frame adoption within a white, Western context. In reality, each country comprises customs and culture that are unique. Rather than make broad claims such as “impoverished children must be saved”, a global ethnography encourages people to look beyond and consider the intricacies that have led to the current situation. Along with a more nuanced lens, ethnographies also focus on the lived experiences of individuals, which leads to a greater degree of authenticity. As long as adoption continues, improved cross-cultural and transnational understanding will only benefit all people involved. Reframing transnational adoption through both discourse and internal affairs will begin to repair some of the damage caused by unequal power relations.
Transnational adoptions create an inherent power differentiation between the sending and receiving countries, predicated on political and socio-economic factors. Power differentiation is exerted through political involvement on behalf of the United States, which has both social and economic ramifications for the affected country. It is reaffirmed through the language and media used to represent transnational adoptions. While the complex interconnection of social, political, and economic relations between the U.S. and other countries may seem difficult to disrupt, some valid strategies can help reduce discrepancies in power and autonomy. Ultimately, we must face the ethical and moral dilemmas posed by transnational adoption, which require confronting privilege and whiteness in a global context.
Works Cited
Bell, K. M. (2013). Raising Africa?: Celebrity and the rhetoric of the white saviour. PORTAL
Journal of Multidisciplinary International Studies,10 (1). doi:10.5130/portal.v10i1.3185
Blum, A. S. (2015). Adoption politics: Families, identities, and power. Journal of Women's
History, 27(1), 168-177,197. doi:http://dx.doi.org.du.idm.oclc.org/10.1353/jowh.2015.0001
Dorow, S. K. (2002, November). Spirited crossings: The political and cultural economy of
transnational adoption (Doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, 2002) [Abstract].
Retrieved June 9, 2019, from
7E23499BPQ/1?accountid=14608. (UMI No. 3066372)
Högbacka, R. (2008). The quest for a child of one's own: Parents, markets and transnational
adoption. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 39(3), 311-IX. Retrieved from
Marre, Diana, and Laura Briggs. International Adoption: Global Inequalities and the Circulation
of Children. New York University Press, 2009.
Patton-Imani, S. (2012). Orphan Sunday: Narratives of salvation in transnational adoption.
Dialog,51(4), 294-304. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6385.2012.00703.x
written by: Logan
written: University of Denver (2019)
published: 2025
