The One Child Policy's Effects on Intercountry Adoption.

By Taylor Slepian

I. Introduction

For decades, China limited each family in the country to only have one child per their “one child policy.” This policy was created as a way to police fertility and as an attempt to grow the economy.¹ This resulted in much criticism, sex discrimination, and a phenomenon known as “the missing girls of China.” With this policy in place, families in the United States have been able to adopt over 160,000 children from China over the last thirty years through a practice known as “intercountry adoption.”² However, in 2016, the one-child policy was lifted, meaning that it was no longer in effect.³ Delay in phasing out the policy is due to political leaders who use population control as a part of their political authority and an administration that has become firmly established in policy enforcement.⁴ In the thirty-five years that the policy has existed, it has created as many as one hundred million of China’s one hundred and fifty million one-child families.⁵ Now, as of August 2024, intercountry adoptions are banned from China, with very limited exceptions. ⁵⁶ As explained below, arguments exist as to why intercountry adoptions are important to countries and families. Conversely, some criticize intercountry adoptions, arguing it should be used only as a last resort because of its harm to the child's culture.

II. One-Child Policy Rationale

China’s “one-child policy” was announced in 1979⁵⁵. The impetus behind the introduction of the policy was that the population growth rate in China had increased 2.8% by 1970.⁶ Consequently, the government was struggling to provide for the people’s needs.⁷ Thus, the government decided to regulate fertility as an alternative.⁸ Through financial incentives and preferential access to housing, schools, and health services, families were encouraged to only have one child.⁹ Conversely, a direct financial penalty was used as the means to restrict people from having more children.¹⁰The Chinese government also encouraged birth control, leading to coerced abortions and sterilization.¹¹ Families in rural communities found this policy to be very difficult.¹² Specifically, these families needed children to help them with tasks in their old age if they were without savings or pension.¹³     One way that families combatted this was by not officially registering children after birth.⁵⁷ Traditionally, sons are preferred in Chinese Culture.¹⁴ This is because they can carry on the family name and inherit ancestral lands.¹⁵ Due to this preference, many females were aborted or abandoned.¹⁶ Consequently, there has been a significant female deficit in population for years.¹⁷ When attempting to explain this, scholars have pointed to sex-selective abortion and prenatal sex selection.¹⁸  In addition, daughters could be abandoned or hidden with relatives to avoid being punished for violating China’s one child policy.¹⁹  This sex discrimination has contributed to China’s high suicide rate for women during reproductive years.²⁰ As a result of the one-child policy, and the lack of  a legal pathway for voluntary relinquishment, many children were left abandoned by their families, who hoped they would be found and provided  with care.²¹ This opened the door for adoption, especially intercountry adoption.²²

III. Adoption as a Solution

With a typically healthy and young female orphan population due to the one-child policy, China designed an international adoption program.²³ Enacted in 1992, Chinese Adoption Law stated that “[a] foreigner may, in accordance with this Law, adopt a child (male or female) in the People's Republic of China.” ²⁴  The Adoption Law of China required prospective parents to go through many preemptive procedures to prevent children from leaving China through “backdoor routes” (illegal methods). Although this law was enacted to protect children from unsafe adoption procedures, illegal adoptions still occurred.²⁶ In 1993, China suspended all adoptions to refine the application and investigation process.²⁷ Then, in 1998, the Chinese Adoption Law was amended again.²⁸ This amendment lowered the minimum parental age for adopters and allowed parents with previous children to adopt.²⁹

The main question when considering intercountry adoption policies is whether intercountry adoption serves the best interests of the adoptees.³⁰ Many scholars have questioned whether taking a child away from their home country is stripping the child away from their culture or giving them a better life. China is part of the Hague Convention as a signatory and therefore is obligated to meet all of the Convention’s requirements for Chinese children to be adopted to other countries.³¹ Due to strict regulations, a child must meet many requirements to be eligible for intercountry adoption.³² Any child in China that is under the age of fourteen is eligible for adoption if they meet one of the three requirements.³³ The first eligibility requirement is that the child’s parents are either dead or announced dead by the court.³⁴ The second eligibility requirement is if a child’s parents cannot easily be ascertained or found.³⁵ The third eligibility requirement children whose parents are unable to rear them due to unusual difficulties.³⁶ Unusual difficulties include illness or disability or other extraneous circumstances.³⁷ As years continued, the fertility rate of China continued to decline, even with the lift of the one-child policy in 2016.³⁸ Low fertility  rates combined with the end of the one child policy meant that China’s orphanages no longer had large populations of healthy, abandoned children.  Hence, the Chinese government began to phase out its program of international adoption.³⁹

IV. The Ban on International Adoption and Promotion of Domestic Adoption

On September 4, 2024, China suddenly announced that it was ending international adoptions for Chinese children.⁴⁰ One purpose of China’s ban on intercountry adoption is promotion of domestic adoption.⁴¹ The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs referred to the subsidiarity principle of the Hague Adoption Convention.⁴² The subsidiary principle was earlier stated in the 1984 holding of Lakshmi Kant Pandey v. Union of India from the Supreme Court of India.⁴³ In Pandey, the Supreme Court of India found that before taking intercountry adoption into consideration, a home for an orphaned child must be sought out in India.⁴⁴ This principle has evolved since the landmark decision.⁴⁵ The principle now states that it is in best interest of children to be raised by family or kin.⁴⁶ If family or kin is unavailable, domestic adoption is next in line as an option.⁴⁶ The exception to this ban on intercountry adoption is for foreigners adopting a child or stepchildren of blood relatives within three generations.⁴⁷ Thus, China’s reference to the subsidiarity principle has begged the question, why now enforce the principle, given that China has been a part of the Hague Convention since 2005?⁴⁸ According to traditional customs in China, there is preference to adopt a young, healthy child.⁴⁹ Government data reveals severe illnesses or disabilities effect 98% of children in state orphanages, which is a significant change from the early years of intercountry adoption when there were many healthy girls in the orphanages.⁵⁰ The number of healthy baby girls abandoned in China has decreased with the lifting of the one-child policy in 2016, and indeed perhaps had declined had much earlier with the apparent growth of sex selective abortions in the early 2000s.⁵¹ In 2022, China reported 159,000 orphans in their population, with 37% living in state orphanages.⁵² A possible reason for the increasing number of orphans could be attributed to COVID-19, which left many children without parents.⁵³ Further, China’s intercountry adoption program supplied funding for orphanages.⁵⁴

V. Conclusion

The history of China’s family planning policies is vastly complex. The one-child policy implemented in 1979 was subject to much criticism and left lasting effects on the country and population. Whether the ban on intercountry adoption is positive or negative will be clearer with time. The goal is to make sure that every child has somewhere to call home. The ban could put the end to unsafe adoption practices between China and other countries. Ultimately, whether China permitting only domestic adoptions is favorable for child welfare will become evident in future years. 

¹ Penny Kane & Ching Y Choi, China's One Child Family Policy,  319 British Medical Journal, 992, 993 (199).

² Elaine Gao, Borders Closed for Children: An Analysis of China’s Ban on International Adoption, Princeton Pol. Rev. (Oct. 23, 2024), https://www.princetonpoliticalreview.org/opinion-1/borders-closed-for-children-an-analysis-of-chinas-ban-on-international-adoptions.

³ Wang et al., The End of China’s One-Child Policy, Brookings (Mar. 30, 2016). https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-end-of-chinas-one-child-policy/.

⁴ Id.

⁵ Id.

⁵⁶ Elaine Gao, Borders Closed for Children: An Analysis of China’s Ban on International Adoption, Princeton Pol. Rev. (Oct. 23, 2024), https://www.princetonpoliticalreview.org/opinion-1/borders-closed-for-children-an-analysis-of-chinas-ban-on-international-adoptions.

⁵⁵ Kane & Choi, supra note 1, at 992.

⁶ Kane & Choi, supra note 1, at 992.

⁷ Id.

⁸ Id.

⁹ Id.

¹⁰ Jiali Li, China’s One-Child Policy: How and How Well Has it Worked? A Case Study of Hebei Province, 21 Population & Development Rev.563, 564 (1995).

¹¹ Wang et al., supra note 3.

¹² Penny Kane & Ching Y Choi, supra note 1, at 993.

¹³ Id.

⁵⁷ Penny Kane & Ching Y Choi, supra note 1, at 992.

¹⁴ Andrew C. Brown, Int’l Adoption Law: A Compar. Analysis, 43 The Int’l Law. 1337, 1345  (2009).

¹⁵ Id.

¹⁶ Id.

¹⁷ Andrea den Boer & Valerie M. Hudson, Have China’s Missing Girls Actually Been There All Along?, New Security Beat (Jan. 9, 2017), https://www.newsecuritybeat.org/2017/01/chinas-missing-girls-along/.

¹⁸ See id.

¹⁹ Kane & Choi, supra note 1, at (page number).

²⁰ Id.

²¹ Id.

²² Id.

²³ Crystal J. Gates, China's Newly Enacted Intercountry Adoption Law: Friend or Foe?, 7 Ind. J. Glob. Legal Stud. 369, 384 (1999).

²⁴ Id.

²⁶ Id.

²⁷ Id.

²⁸ Id.

²⁹ Gates, supra note 23, at (page number).

³⁰ Id.

³¹ Brown, supra note 14, at 1346.  

³² Id.

³³ Id.

³⁴ Id.

³⁵ Id.

³⁶ Id.

³⁷ Brown, supra note 14, at 1346.

³⁸ Zhang Jun, China’s Accelerating Fertility Crisis, Project Syndicate (Mar. 23, 2021), https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/china-fertility-rate-population-aging-two-child-policy-by-zhang-jun-2021-03.

³⁹ Id.

⁴⁰ Elaine Gao, supra note 2.

⁴¹ Id.

⁴² Id.

⁴³ Int’l Adoption & Principle of Subsidiarity, Int’l Soc. Serv. USA, https://www.iss-usa.org/international-adoption-and-the-principle-of-subsidiarity/ (last visted Oct. 22, 2025).

⁴⁴ Id.

⁴⁵ Id.

⁴⁶ Id.

⁴⁶ Id.

⁴⁷ Bloomberg News, China Brings Heartbreak to US Families with Foreign Adoption Ban, Agape Adoptions (Sept. 12, 2024, 7:00 AM), https://agapeadoptions.org/blog/f/china-brings-heartbreak-to-us-families-with-foreign-adoption-ban.

⁴⁸ Yanzhong Huang, A Closed Door for Orphans? Unpacking China’s International Adoption Policy, Council on Foreign Rels. (Sept. 6, 2024, 4:20 PM). https://www.cfr.org/blog/closed-door-orphans-unpacking-chinas-international-adoption-policy.

⁴⁹ Id.

⁵⁰ Id.

⁵¹ Id.; see David Smolin, The Missing Girls of China, 41 Cumberland Law Rev. 1 (2011).

⁵² Yanzhong Huang, supra note 48. 

⁵³ Id.

⁵⁴ Margaret Ryznar, Adoption in China: Past, Present and Yet to Come, 45 Ga. J. Int’l & Compar.  L., 27, 42 (2017).