“There can be no more intense discovery of society’s spirit than how it treats its youngsters.”

- Nelson Mandela

Inter-country adoption is an inexorably normal type of family development. It very well may be characterized as a reception of a kid by an individual of another nation.

In the course of the most recent ten years the number of children who are received by families who live outside the birth country of the child has increased significantly. The increasingly globalized world is obscuring the edges of racial, ethnic or national personalities and opening the doors of a forever home for these children.

The expansion in the number of children being received by families from different nations has additionally been the reason for a colossal increment in Public Policy Controversy, prompting The Hague Convention and Treaty on International Adoption, and various nations changing their inside laws and approaches, to regulate inter country adoption practices. It has likewise prompted a genuine lessening in the opportunity for a huge number of kids who need families to ever have this chance, or to gain from this opportunity early enough in their lives to get away from the assaults of absence of sustain, regulation, hunger, and lack of educational facility. A survey of the examination of results for children embraced globally finds that the kids for the most part do very well. Connection, personality, and solace with appropriation issues are commonly answered to be acceptable. Universal adoptee regularly sees racial segregation issues as more disturbing than issues originating from adoption. The rates at which international adoption upset or lead to the return of the kid to the pre-supportive condition are proportional to those for domestic adoptions. Nonetheless, the procedure in regards the repatriation of the child has not been clarified by the legislation across the world including India.

The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 has been passed by the Parliament of India amidst intense controversy, debate and protest of many of its provisions by Child Rights Fraternity. The act also sought to create a universally accessible adoption law for India, overtaking the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act 1956 and the Guardians and Wards Act 1890 thereby trying to ensure the filling of existing gaps and loopholes in the system.

Adoption is the act of taking something on as your own. Adoption usually refers to the legal process of becoming a non-biological parent. Adoption can be a most beautiful solution not only for a childless couple and single people but also for homeless children desperately in need of a family environment crucial for their overall development. Howsoever, a failed adoption can equally be a nightmare if not cumbersome for a child who is unable to adjust within a family. The point of origin of this paradox emanates from the fact that a legislation that promises to ensure the paramount interests of a child is unable to speak much about the instances of dissolution of an adoption. The aforementioned Juvenile Justice Act responsible for regulating each and every procedure pertaining to Inter-country Adoption has glorified its essence by placing reliance on the following principles enumerated in s. 3 of the Act as “Principle of Best Interest, Principle of Safety and Principle of Repatriation and Restoration”.

Juvenile Justice Act traces its origin from the Hague Convention of 29 May, 1993 on Protection of Children and Co-operation that in turn reaffirms the intent behind the Juvenile Justice Act pertaining to the principles of best interests and welfare of a child.

It is incumbent to stress on the functioning of the only governing body which regulates inter-country adoption in India, “Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA)”. Having attained the highest status for regulating a procedure which is not just a formal procedure but involves investment of emotions, time and the overall development with regard to a family, the authorities involved in the process seem to be reluctant to effectuate the process in a humane manner.

As much as the initiation of a procedure entails numerous factors for actually bringing it to a conclusion, the law in hand has overlooked the casualties that a child would have to face upon breakdown of the said process. It is stated with emphasis that Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 happens to be a much needed push considering the welfare of all those children who were in fact devoid of the love of a family, but yet remains mute to the conditions wherein the children are stuck in an atmosphere that in no way helps them to grow.

An inter-country adoption derived more relevance than an in-country adoption due to the very fact that the latter still leaves a scope for the children with regard to their ethnicities, however in the former adoption scenario a child has to anyhow undergo the obliviousness of a foreign land and nowhere to go in situations where he actually needs help.

The formation of authorities under the aforementioned legislation was primarily to ensure the functioning of an already cumbersome process but an outright denial and no explanation whatsoever from their end makes it difficult for every party involved in an adoption process.

Not only the above stated arena is an area of concern, but the fact that despite statutory provisions for a follow-up procedure, the same remains absent in actual practice. Had the authorities been functional enough to ensure that a child who is far away from his land is in reality bearing the fruits of a successful adoption, the real picture in respect of this area would have already found light of the day.

The fact that derives more relevance however is that any actual practice can only be challenged if it is not in consonance with a prevailing provision in a statute. The bigger issue in this particular context remains that the process of dissolution of an adoption is a hidden procedure whose veracity can only be checked by the authorities concerned or the Courts claiming and justifying the surety of justice. Despite various precedents by the Apex Court of India reiterating time and again the urge and need to ensure the best interests of children, the same happens to be a talk of town for its relevance and application seems to be absent in reality. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in a landmark case of Laxmikant Pandey Vs. Union of India [AIR1984 SC469]. In case of inter-country adoption, it sometimes become very difficult to terminate the adoption due to absence of express provisions.

Even though the aforementioned law has a negative aspect to its existence but the same has never culled out as a blot on the legislations pertaining to a child’s welfare due to the very existence of an optimistic approach it entails. The Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 has till date been a home and origin for various parentless children in search of a family able to guarantee them the love and care required for his/her development into a responsible citizen of this country. It can be stated without a doubt that a child in need of care, love and protection can come out to be a yielding individual for a country when offered the best in his surroundings. The above stated law and corresponding authorities are working in compliance with each other every day to achieve the goals that are still a long way to go.