[Series] The Evolution Continues - Sex, Love, and Family | Episode 4
Name the Country that Refuses the Protected Birth Bill Despite Babies Abandoned in Shopping Bags Revisiting the Protected Birth Bill Ahead of July June 28, 2024
In June 2023, South Korea was shaken by the “Suwon Refrigerator Infant Incident.” During an investigation into missing infants with recorded but unregistered births, authorities discovered that Ko, married and a mother of three, had taken the lives of two newborns delivered in 2018 and 2019, concealing their bodies in her refrigerator, where they remained undiscovered for five years later. This tragic case catalyzed three significant reforms across South Korea. First, penalties for infant abandonment and infanticide have been strengthened, with such acts now classified as general abandonment and homicide to ensure more stringent sentencing. Second, a new policy mandates that healthcare providers report all births to relevant authorities to prevent unregistered births, resulting in the establishment of the Birth Notification System. Third, the Protected Birth Bill (formally, the "Special Act on Support for Crisis Pregnancies, Anonymous Births, and Child Protection") now provides a legal option for women to give birth anonymously if they wish to protect their identities. Both the Birth Notification System and the Protected Birth Bill are scheduled for implementation on July 19.
Examining the Link Between Ko’s Case and New Policy Measures Ko’s case and the resulting policies prompt an essential question: Do these measures establish a direct link in preventing infant abandonment and murder? First, past penalties for infant abandonment were limited to a fine of up to 3 million KRW (approximately 3,000 USD) or a prison sentence of up to two years, while child homicide carried a maximum of 10 years, far less severe than penalties for general abandonment or homicide. The shift to stricter penalties under general abandonment and homicide categories appears justified in establishing a stronger deterrent. Second, since newborns were previously registered voluntarily by parents, cases like Ko’s went undetected unless unregistered infants were specifically investigated. The Birth Notification System directly addresses this gap, providing a structural link to prevent undetected infant abandonment or homicide. Third, Ko attributed her actions to "economic hardship," indicating that effective policy measures should strengthen childcare support for economically vulnerable families. However, the government has instead allocated 4.2 billion KRW to the Protected Birth Bill, which promotes anonymous births. While intended to support mothers, the policy’s direct link to preventing infant abandonment and murder remains unclear.
The Wide Spectrum of Infant Abandonment and Murder In March, South Korea’s Ministry of Health and Welfare issued a press release declaring “We are preparing for the scheduled implementation of the Protected Birth Bill in July 2024 through collaboration with relevant agencies, ensuring it proceeds smoothly.” Additionally it announced that “beginning in July, a crisis pregnancy counseling hotline will be established in 12 locations nationwide to make counseling accessible anywhere, and support for single-parent families, including unwed mothers, has been strengthened to provide a foundation for crisis-pregnant women to raise their children after birth.” However, a closer look at the details reveals a more limited scope of action, with only “90% of childcare service fees for single-parent families, including young single parents, to be subsidized (for households below 150% of the median income), and child support for infants aged 0-1 in single-parent households with parents under 24 years old increased from 350,000 KRW (approx.. 260 USD) to 400,000 KRW (approx.. 300 USD) per month (for households below 65% of the median income).” Can this support adequately address the wide spectrum of causes behind infant homicide? Even if the policy had been in place earlier, Ko likely would have made the same decisions, as she did not fall under the categories of a single-parent household nor a young single parent under 24. The causes of infant abandonment and homicide are complex and varied. While some cases involve mothers fearing exposure of their identity or pregnancy, others, like Ko’s, are driven by factors such as economic hardship, the birth of a child with disabilities, psychological issues, or pregnancy denial, which can delay awareness of the pregnancy until birth. The Protected Birth Bill does not encompass this broad range of factors, nor does it address crises that may emerge from the onset of pregnancy. These limitations raise serious doubts as to whether preparations for the bill’s July implementation will indeed “[ensure] it proceeds smoothly.”
The Increase of Orphans and Adoptees Ultimately, women facing crisis-pregnancies may feel compelled to choose anonymous birth and relinquish their children. These children then enter the adoption system, allowing adoption agencies gain access to a larger pool of adoptable children. Could this lead to a recurrence of the dark history of adoption from the 1970s and 1980s, when children born to unwed mothers, those from impoverished families, and even abandonned or missing children found on the streets were assigned orphan status and sent abroad for adoption—generating considerable profits and evolving into a large industry? This raises the question: whose interests does the Protected Birth Bill primarily serve? Does it serve mothers who, under state protection, may choose to give up their children? Does it serve the children who, with limited birth information and narrative, may face lifelong challenges regarding identity due to restricted knowledge of their biological parents? Or does it benefit adoption agencies that, in exchange for fees, send children to domestic and international adoptive parents? Finally, does it serve the interests of the state by reducing welfare expenditure on low-income women and families?
▲ Though overdue, strengthening essential support for pregnant women and low-income families facing economic, psychological, and physical challenges is imperative. ⓒ Morguefile
The United Kingdom: Upholding Children’s Right to Know and the Right to Be Raised by Their Biological Families France, Germany, Switzerland, and other countries that allow anonymous childbirth are frequently cited in discussions supporting the Protected Birth Bill in South Korea. Yet, one country is seldom mentioned in this context: the United Kingdom. In the UK, anonymous childbirth is not permitted. Furthermore, unlike the United States, the UK has no "Safe Haven Law" that allows for children to be securely left in designated locations. Since 1861, Article 27 of the Offences against the Person Act has classified the abandonment of children under the age of two as a criminal offense, punishable by up to five years in prison, with no exceptions permitting such abandonment. Instead, UK policies have consistently prioritized counseling and comprehensive support for pregnant women in crisis and low-income families. Nonetheless, though the incidence remains low, cases of child abandonment do occur. In response to this, the British Conservative Party submitted petitions to Parliament in 2016 and 2017, advocating for the adoption of a Safe Haven Law similar to that of the United States. For parliamentary discussion, each petition required 10,000 signatures; however, only 404 people signed in 2016, and a mere 22 in 2017. As a result, both petitions, each active for six months, were ultimately dismissed. In January 2024, however, the case of a newborn named Elsa—abandoned in a shopping bag with her umbilical cord still attached—deeply affected British society. This situation was further intensified by genetic evidence confirming that Elsa was the sibling of two other infants abandoned in 2017 and 2019. Motivated by this incident, a young woman named Toyin Odumala, who was herself found as an abandoned infant, launched an online petition. Her personal connection to the cause drew considerable public attention to her campaign: “I was abandoned as a newborn on July 26th 2001. After my mother had given birth to me at home, she left me outside her flat where two dog walkers found me wrapped in a denim jacket. I was taken to hospital and, thankfully, I was in perfect condition. After four months in care, I was adopted by my Nigerian parents whom I have lived with ever since. Not every newborn is this lucky. [...] In the United States, Safe Haven Baby Boxes have been implemented across various states with great success. These boxes provide a safe space for mothers who feel they cannot care for their child to anonymously leave them at designated locations like fire stations or hospitals. They are equipped with heating and cooling features and an alarm system that notifies emergency services immediately when a baby is placed inside. The UK needs these boxes too [...] Let's make sure no baby has to start life abandoned on a doorstep or worse - sign this petition today so we can bring Safe Haven Baby Boxes to the UK!” – “Implement Safe Haven Baby Boxes in the UK,” a petition on change.org
In less than three months, Odumala’s petition had gathered approximately 41,000 signatures, reflecting a much stronger public response than previous parliamentary petitions on the issue.
Two Approaches to Addressing Infant Abandonment and Homicide However, in a BBC article on this topic, an impact director from Save the Children remarked that while Odumala is a “remarkable person in challenging circumstances,” the most effective approach is to provide “more help and support for families to prevent poverty and other problems, so no baby is abandoned and every child has the best start in life.” In the same article, the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) commented that improving care that support all stages of pregnancy is one of its “top priorities.” Its spokesperson noted that the department is “[investing] £165m per year, rising to £186m from April, to grow the maternity workforce and improve neonatal care across England as well as putting £6.8m towards tackling disparities in maternity care to ensure all mothers-to-be feel safe during and after giving birth.” Between 1998 and 2005, the UK reported an annual average of 16 cases of child abandonment. By contrast, the United States, following the implementation of the “Safe Haven Law,” saw 4,505 babies legally surrendered in baby boxes between 1999 and 2021. This stark difference in child abandonment rates may be attributed to the UK’s consistent commitment among child welfare advocates and government policymakers to uphold children's fundamental rights, as stipulated by the United Nations. This includes a child’s right to know and, as a priority, be raised by their parents. Two primary approaches have emerged for addressing child abandonment: the UK approach and the US approach. With South Korea scheduled to implement the Protected Birth Bill on July 19 of this year, the country appears to have aligned with the US approach. If this path cannot be reversed, it is essential, at the very least, to prevent a situation where thousands of babies are legally abandoned, as witnessed in the United States. Now is the time to strengthen substantial support for “pregnant women facing economic, psychological, and physical difficulties” (Article 1 of the Special Act on Support for Crisis Pregnancies, Anonymous Births, and Child Protection) and for low-income families. ----------------------------------------------------------------- This column, written by Hee Jung Kwon, director of UMI4AA, was adapted from an article published on OhmyNews on June 28, 2024. “Name the Country that Refuses the Protected Birth Bill Despite Babies Abandoned in Shopping Bags” – OhmyNews (ohmynews.com)
|