Monday 5 September 2016

Should the US government give adoptees the US citizenship?

Source background

According to “They grew up as American citizens, then learned that they weren’t”, Justin Ki-Hong (33) adopted in 1985 from South Korea to the US has found he is on the verge of being deported from the USA where he has lived as an American for his life time because adoptive parents didn’t know the adoption law in the 1980’s. After The Child Citizenship Act went into effect since 2001, more than 100,000 international adoptees under 18 who were already in the US automatically received the US citizenship; however, over 18 years old adoptees at that time hadn’t received that benefit. The number of adoptees who are in trouble is more than tens of thousands adoptees from Venezuela, Germany, India, Guatemala, Vietnam and Iran and Korean international adoptees is estimated up to 18,000 and the article showed different cases like Justin Ki-Hong (2016)
_______________________________________ 

My Yes/No question is:

Should the US government give adoptees the US citizenship?


My answer is:


Yes, because they are Americans, the US government should revise the law immediately and make them feel pride in Americans.


Support

In “Total Recall” (1990), “Oblivion” (2013), “Maze Runner” (2014), there are people who don’t remember who they were and what they were doing in the past. Their memories were, however, technically erased and skillfully implanted with new memories by secret groups which could have probably worked for the government and whose work is covering the government’s dirty faces. Even though they don’t know how to remember and regain their erased memories, they are struggling to find and know who are they and try to do everything they can.

People were adopted into the US family have remembered everything what they have done so far and who they were and are, so they don’t need to try to reveal and investigate their past and their authentic nationalities. They are absolutely Americans not stateless people. Nonetheless, because their parents hadn’t known the fact that they had to change and submit the documents, adoptees are in hot water. It is an unbelievable story, yet I would rather talk about people living in Korea than talk about US people related to this story. Because adoptees were once Koreans and they were abandoned by whom people had given birth to.

Abandoning baby is not a private matter, yet a social issue. There is a box named of “the Baby Box” and was prepared by a church located in Seoul, Korea. It is neither a cradle nor a baby carrier. It is a special box equipped with a bell and a life support system, a.k.a., an incubator. When people put a baby into the box, they are encouraged to put a memo written down baby’s birthday and ring the bell so that people inside the church can hear the sound of the bell for 24 hours and rescue a baby immediately. It wasn’t there until December 2009. A church set up the baby box to rescue abandoned babies who might have died in the street. After installing the incubator box, abandoned babies come from not only Seoul, but also other cities. According to the church, roughly 300 babies are abandoned per year, and more than 900 hundred babies are put into the box from 2010~2015 in South Korea. Even though the church involved in social service is trying to rescue abandoned babies, some human rights organizations in Korea criticize the baby box because the church is doing not only illegal behavior, but also instigation of illegal delivery which could sever the chance to meet between moms and babies in the future. However, in despite of criticism by the human rights groups, the church needs more facilities for abandoned babies because the number of abandoned babies into the box increases sharply annually.

The South Korean government should actively deal with this problem. South Korean’s international adoption had started just after the Korean War in 1953. After the Korean War, mixed-blood children were sent to abroad under the pretext of returning to father’s country, so South Korea could have dealt with the problem of war orphans and curtail expenditure of social welfare. The government, then, enacted the special Act on orphan in 1961 and they prepared for the legal foundation of international adaptation. In the middle of 1970’s, South Korea sent more than 5,000 children to foreign countries annually and just before the Olympic Games, 8,837 Korean children were sent to overseas in 1985. Before the South Korea holds the Asian Games in 1986 and the Seoul Olympic Games in 1998, many people and human rights groups criticized an international adoption is one of South Korea’s export goods. The South Korean government then severely considered not to export Korean babies to overseas and tried to reduce international adoption. The administration of Kim, Dae-Jung and Noh, Moo-Hyoun declared the government tries to reduce the number of international adoptees remarkably. However, it has failed. According to the US government report, South Korea took fourth place; China, Ethiopia, Russia, followed by South Korea, from 2009 to 2012 and the number of adoptees is more than 20,000 babies from 1999 to 2015.

Ironically, even though there are many abandoned babies waiting for their new parents, the South Korean government has been promoting the increase of the birthrate since in the middle of 2000’s because the birthrate of South Korea is the tailender in the world with Japan, Hong-Kong, and Singapore. In recent years, many do not, on the one hand, want to get married and give birth to babies because of economic difficulties, on the other hand, some indiscreetly had a meaningless sex and have babies. A lot of abandoned babies are delivered by single mothers whose age ranged from 15 to 20. They are to be blamed at and should take responsibilities for their behaviors that are extremely imprudent and unwise. They had to abort their babies at the initial stage although the South Korean government bans women from aborting their babies except for special occasions. (According to “The Mother and Child Health Law”, the abortion is permitted in following cases, including rape, incest, hereditary disorders, and when the mother's health is in mortal danger). On account of their reckless decisions and momentary pleasures of the body, they make lots of people settle problems and the government spends the taxes in the social welfare services. What is more, South Koreans ought to change their mind in some ways. Most Koreans, for example, have a tendency not to adopt children and they think their legitimate son can only succeed to their lineage. It shows the number of overseas adoptions is far bigger than the number of domestic adoptions.

International Korean Adoptee Associations (I.K.A.A.) holds a meeting in Seoul every year, and gives adoptees chances to learn Korean culture, and history. Especially, hosts place emphasis on the recovery of their identities because they got confused and were suffered from an identity crisis when they were young, so Koreans and the South Korean government could help their problems and we have to soothe their scars on their minds even though scars cannot be removed forever. Not only are they our overseas Koreans, but they were also abandoned by Koreans and the government. We should also find the solutions to reduce the pregnancy of reckless mid –teenagers by teaching abstinence and the bad consequences of pregnancy at school. The government should support abandoned babies and take care of them constantly until they can stand alone in our society. 
___________
Reference
     Abortion law. (2016, September 2). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 14:54, September 5, 2016, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Abortion_law&oldid=737335168



International adoption of South Korean children. (2016, August 22). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 14:14, September 5, 2016, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=International_adoption_of_South_Korean_children&oldid=735763793

Nixon, R. (2009 November 8). Adopted From Korea and in Search of Identity. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/09/us/09adopt.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1

Oblivion (2013 film). (2016, August 26). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 14:39, September 5, 2016, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Oblivion_(2013_film)&oldid=736288642

The Maze Runner (film). (2016, September 4). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 14:45, September 5, 2016, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Maze_Runner_(film)&oldid=737694618


Total Recall (1990 film). (2016, August 31). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 14:40, September 5, 2016, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Total_Recall_(1990_film)&oldid=737130446

1 comment:

  1. Jay's wide ranging responses to his source present some interesting, and controversial, issues to comment on.
    First is the idea popularised in the films Jay mentions. When it first came out, I thought that Total Recall starring Arnold Schwarzenegger (thank goodness for spell checking) was a great film that combined some serious action with an exciting story that raised challenging questions about what it is to be a person. I think that if we lose our memories or have them replaced then we really do stop being the person that we were before. The film brings this out very well with the full, independent personalities that sequentially inhabit the same body because of changes made to the brain. This reminds me of horrific diseases like Alzheimer's, which destroy the person whilst leaving the human body. And this has a connection with some of the ideas in Stephen Law's essay "Carving the Roast Beast." What do you think?

    And Jay ends with some comments on the ever controversial topic of abortion. Again, I think that there are also connections here with the arguments developed in Law's essay. Since abortion benefits many and normally harms none, it's hard to see how laws that do not allow women to have an abortion on demand could be morally justified, at least for a foetus before six months. Law does not directly address this issue, but one of his cited sources received death threats because of the logical development of the argument partially given Law's long quotation from his work. Which of Law's cited sources is this, do you think?

    ReplyDelete

Before you click the blue "Publish" button for your first comment on a post, check ✔ the "Notify me" box. You want to know when your classmates contribute to a discussion you have joined.

A thoughtful response should normally mean writing for five to ten minutes. After you state your main idea, some details, explanation, examples or other follow up will help your readers.

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.