Commodity of Convenience: Why “Any Child” Is Never the Right One to Adopt
The Mantra
“I just want to raise a child.”
The words sound warm on the surface. But underneath, the mantra reveals a consumer’s attitude toward human beings.
The speaker wants a child, any child, as if children are interchangeable. A baby from Guatemala or Korea or Ethiopia will do. A child of any race, any culture, any origin. The only requirement is availability.
This is consumption dressed in sentimental language. Love sees the child as a person with inalienable rights. Consumption just sees a vacancy to fill.
The Commodity
Potential adopters often view children as commodities. They want a “healthy infant,” a “child to raise,” a “family to complete.”
The child becomes a product meant to fulfill a need. Their origins, culture, identity, and trauma become secondary to the adopter’s desire.
The language reveals the attitude. “We’re adopting a child” sounds like purchasing a product. “We’re expanding our family” sounds like a business decision. “We want to give a child a better life” assumes the life the child had, with their own family, was worthless.
Agencies market children as “available” and “waiting.” They match kids to families. The transaction completes when the papers are signed and the child is placed. But that trafficked person deserves to be seen as a human being, not a product.
The Erasure
The “any child” mantra thoughtlessly obliterates the person’s identity. They were already born with a name, culture, lineage, and story. Adopters who demand “any available child” ignore all of this.
Any differences become an inconvenience. Original heritage becomes an obstacle. Real family becomes a footnote.
Get MS’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
The adoptee is expected to assimilate, forget, and perform constant thanks. Their true identity is sealed away, buried in a hidden file. This is the cost of the ‘any child’ mentality: the erasure of a person’s entire existence.
The transferred person is seen only as a placeholder, a prop in someone else’s story.
The Damage
The damage is lifelong. Those who grow up in stranger-families that treated them as interchangeable report higher rates of depression, anxiety, and identity confusion.
The message is clear: you are here to fill a void. Your name, face, story, none of it mattered. What mattered was the adopter’s need.
This is use disguised as love.
What Should Happen
Love begins with seeing every child as a unique individual. Their origins, culture, history, and real family matter. Regardless of the person’s age, even newborns, no one is a blank slate.
The kindest alternative to this self-centered mess of an industry is family preservation. Resources should flow toward keeping families together, supporting moms, and preventing the circumstances that lead to child trafficking.
When preservation is impossible, guardianship offers a dignified option. The child keeps their name, identity, and family connections. The legal arrangement is honest about what it is, a stable caregiving situation, not a family replacement.
Anyone who claims to truly love a child and align with human rights, respects all of this. Children are people, not products or needs to be fulfilled. Every human being deserves to be seen and honored, not consumed.
~~~~~~
Sources:
Lifton, B. J. (1994). Journey of the Adopted Self: A Quest for Wholeness. Basic Books.
Smolin, D. M. (2012). Of Orphans and Adoption, Parents and the Poor, Exploitation and Rescue: A Scriptural and Theological Critique of the Evangelical Christian Adoption and Orphan Care Movement. Regent Journal of International Law, 8(2), 267–324.
Brodzinsky, D. M., & Pinderhughes, E. E. (2002). Parenting and child development in adoptive families. Handbook of Parenting, 1, 279–311.
