Attorney Kim Sunhugh shares insights into the birth search process, Part 1

Hello, I’m attorney Kim Sun-hugh. I would like to share some insights and experiences from working with overseas adoptees during their visits to their agencies, the National Center for the Rights of the Child (NCRC), and the police. I cannot say that having an attorney present during these visits will dramatically affect the outcome, nor can I say whether having such legal assistance is always necessary. 

During the visits, I strived to ask the agency representatives as many questions as possible, demand answers, and provide explanations to the overseas adoptees who were with me. Through this process, I gained a better understanding of the experiences overseas adoptees face when visiting Korea to search for their birth parents and the truth about their adoption, the practical realities that cannot be fully grasped through legal provisions alone, and the limitations they encounter. As an attorney representing overseas adoptees in information disclosure lawsuits and arguing about the unconstitutionality of relevant laws, these experiences helped me clearly recognize the barriers we face. If the adoptees I have met happen to read this newsletter, I would like to thank them for giving me the opportunity to accompany them.

1. Preparing for a Visit to Korea

Adoptees from the United States, Europe, Australia, and other countries must invest considerable time and money to visit Korea and meet with various agencies during their stay. Moreover, it is not easy for them to gather the information they need during their short stay in Korea. This is because information is scattered and fragmented. Knowing where to visit, what to request, and what is possible when searching for one’s origins is not transparently or systematically organized or disclosed. From the perspective of overseas adoptees, the public services available in Korea to assist with their search for roots are very limited and superficial, and the capacity of the few non-governmental organizations is insufficient compared to the demand. On a fundamental level, this area should be publicly supported by the state, which in the past has neglected public oversight of overseas adoptions. There is also a need to enable adoptees to obtain necessary information from Korea and connect with their parents or families without having to bear the significant cost and effort of visiting Korea in person.

2. Visiting Adoption Agencies and Accessing Records

Many adoptees who come to Korea will likely visit their adoption agency, as most adoption records are still not under public management by the state and are entirely held by the adoption agencies.

However, the extremely defensive attitude of adoption agencies toward adoptees is probably well-known to overseas adoptees. When I visited an agency with an overseas adoptee to access their adoption records, the staff initially demanded that I, as a third-party attorney, wait outside because I was not allowed to view the records. After a bit of a dispute with the staff, the adoptee and I were eventually able to view the records together. However, the social worker was reluctant to let go of the adoption file and seemed uncomfortable with the idea of the overseas adoptee or myself, as an attorney, directly handling and reading through the file. It appeared that the scope of records available for viewing and the thoroughness of the viewing process varied depending on the individual social worker and whether an attorney was present.

When visiting the adoption agency in person, we were able to see slightly more types of adoption-related documents compared to the limited documents usually provided by agencies via email in response to information disclosure requests. However, crucially, even by visiting the adoption agency, it was not possible to confirm the information about birth parents. This is due to a provision in the Special Adoption Act that prohibits the disclosure of birth parents’ information to adoptees unless the birth parents have explicitly consented to the disclosure. Even visiting the adoption agency in person cannot overcome this legal constraint.

In March of this year, a few other attorneys and I initiated a lawsuit related to the non-disclosure of birth parents’ personal information. We recently submitted a written request to the court to seek a ruling from the Constitutional Court, arguing that the provision in the Special Adoption Act is unconstitutional. As the National Assembly is not actively taking steps to change the law, we are seeking to bring about change through a constitutional lawsuit.

Apart from the personal information of birth parents, which is currently prohibited from disclosure by law, I believe the entire adoption record should be made available for viewing as much as possible. Adoption agencies are defensive about allowing access to records, citing the privacy of birth parents and adoptive parents, even though the records are about the adoptees themselves. Therefore, more efforts are needed to expand the scope of access to original records.

Starting next year, the NCRC, a public institution, is scheduled to take over the management of adoption records from adoption agencies and handle information disclosure request procedures. However, the process is reportedly proceeding slowly due to the defensive and passive attitude of adoption agencies in transferring the records. We must continue to urge for the strengthening of public management of adoption records at the national level.