Inequality near and far: Adoption as seen from the Brazilian favelas

Law & Society Review, 2002 by Fonseca, Claudia

They were saying things like, "This child can't be my nephew, it can't be my grandson. It's a child of the night, of the partylife. It has no father. " They just kept after me. All that revolted me. When you're pregnant, it's easy to get upset.

The young woman had no hope of being able to pay a non-- relative to keep her child. Even were she to work, for example, as a maid, she could not expect to receive more than one or two minimum salaries (US$60-$120 a month), hardly enough to feed and pay for the day care of three children. (The government-allotted family allowance, available only to salaried workers, would add no more than a monthly US$6 per child.) She knew that many families-recently married couples with no children of their own, sterile women, and simply older couples whose children were all grown-would be on the lookout for a precious bundle such as she had to offer. But, especially when coveting the infant of a non-relative, the prospective parents were reluctant to share parental responsibilities, and even less willing to consider their parenthood of only temporary standing. In these circumstances, Eliane had little choice but to give her newborn child away.

We should remember that there is good reason to believe that the great majority of children given in adoption in Brazil have identifiable parents.16 There is also reason to presume that many of these parents "consent" to give their children in adoption because of sheer poverty.17 In other words, they are not embarrassed adolescents trying to cover up a sexual faux pas so they can start life anew. It therefore makes sense that, no matter how poor or unprepared they are, many women, like Eliane, seek an active role in the decisions affecting their child's future-first and foremost of which is the choice of surrogate parents.

Eliane thus went searching among relatives and acquaintances for her future child's adoptive parents and, shortly before giving birth, found what she was looking for. Her choice fell upon the baby's paternal aunt, a woman who, after years of trying for a pregnancy, had recently birthed a stillborn child. Eliane recalls the circumstances of this encounter with amazing detail: the hesitation, the tears, and the respect with which the potential mother treated her: "[The adoptive mother] said, `Look Eliane, we don't want to force you.' She gave me liberty to do what I wanted." But, after a week's soul-searching and mutual support, the decision was made. As our narrator tells it, she went to the would-be mother's house, and the two women sat there crying-- the baby between them, in his crib-until Eliane drew herself up to say, "No, you keep him."

It would be misleading to frame the analysis of this scene entirely in terms of individual maternal rights. A birth mother's decisions are enmeshed in a social fabric wherein other members of the extended family (particularly older women) are constantly giving opinions and exerting pressure to influence what many consider the collective rights and obligations over the group's offspring. Yet, in general, mothers occupy and, what's more, wish to occupy a central place in this process.