You'll see my name in the New York Times

This article, found in the New York Times, is about the author, Drucilla Cornell, and her experience adopting a daughter in 1993 from Paraguay, two years before international adoption was banned. The author also talks about how international adoptions are being banned country by country and how fears of trafficking children for adoption and taking children from the biological mother without consent is a fear that she has.

I feel that the author is quite obviously open to international adoption and feels that for some children it may make the difference between life and death. However, she states repeatedly that she wanted to make sure that her adopted daughter’s biological mother consented fully to giving up the child for adoption so from that I can draw that she supports international adoption as long as it is completely legal.

Cornell makes her argument by providing facts and telling her own story. She first begins with telling the reader about her adoption of a girl from Paraguay and then moves on to why it was such a big ordeal due to citizens protesting against the adoptions of babies from that country. She also talks about different adoption situations and how it affects the children and their views of their culture, which I thought could have been left out because then she goes back to talking about why countries oppose the adoptions and finishes with how she wants her and her daughter to meet her daughter’s biological mother. I feel that the way she argues for international adoption is very subtle. At no point is she disrespectful or biased. She seems to keep an open mind throughout the article. At one point she provides an example of Madonna’s adoption of a baby from Malawi and how it sparked a lot of controversy and how the parents of that child supposedly did not actually give the baby up for adoption. It shows that adoption trafficking can be a huge problem and is one of the main reasons why so many countries are banning it.

Since the argument is so subtle, it is hard to agree completely on one thing. I share her support in adoption from other countries because I think it is beneficial to children who may otherwise have died or lived unsatisfying lives. I also feel that if I were to adopt a child I would want to be sure that the biological mother consented to adoption and that the child wasn’t taken from her. I think it’s awful that some countries are completely opposed to it, but they must have their reasons. I know that there are still many children in this country that are waiting to be adopted too, so even if international adoption does get completely banned someday, we will still have many children here that need loving homes and a second chance.

I really liked that the author had her own experience with international adoption. It made the article more interesting to me and I feel that it made her qualified to be writing about the topic. I feel that she could have left out the part when she talks about couples that are not heterosexual because she didn’t really elaborate on it so it felt like it was just thrown in there.
I would like to stay fairly unbiased in my paper, although it might be harder because where I will be clearly arguing a point, she had a more subtle approach to how she expressed her position on the subject. I also like that she used her own personal story, I think that it is a great way to capture a reader’s attention and show that you know what you’re talking about.