Paper short abstract:

My research considers adoption as a means of child circulation from Russia. Although adoption is a highly formalised process, there are several informal networks related to it. My objective is to present how 'the child' is viewed in its circulation between countries.

Paper long abstract:

Transnational adoption is getting more and more popular and children are being "circulated" among countries of First and Third world or "silently migrate" from one country to another. Whereas the fertility rate in industrialised countries is getting lower, the lack of children is compensated by getting them from countries of development or countries in transition, where children abandonment is on rise. From 1996 Russia is one of the major "giving" country in international adoptions in Europe and the USA: in Spain Russia is second "giving" country after China. The growing demand of children from Third world for international adoptions have risen many concerns in "giving" countries and some of them replied to this process by restricting adoptions laws or total prohibitions of international adoptions. In case of Russia, foreign citizens adopted 9,4thousand (59%) in 2004, and Russian- 7thousand(41%) and these figures created a great tension in a camp of international adoption. Besides, legal cases of "killings"(13 starting from 1996) of children adopted in Russia abroad, abuse and "trafficking" added more to the negative image of international adoptions in Russia. As a consequence, following "best interests of a child", Russian laws have been modified and restricted international adoptions.

Therefore, my research falls into the framework, concerning adoption as a means of "child circulation" , in particular, as an informal child circulation. Although adoption seems to be highly formalised process, there are a lot of informal networks and "facilitators" around it, especially in reference to countries with limited access and extreme bureaucracy, as Russia. Besides, not all international adoptions go through adoption agencies, but also by "independent adoptions", which is still allowed in Russia. My objective is to see, following Leifsen, Yngvesson, Fonseca (2003) frameworks, how is a child "transacted", "negotiated" between one country or another, how a child objectified and how "best interests of a child" and "rights discourse" are interpreted by different parties in international adoption, in my case, Russia and Spain. I believe that this cross-cultural analysis will be fruitful for cross-cultural adoption studies in Europe,in general, and for Bristol conference, in particular.