How The 2012 Special Adoption Law Revision Made Searching For Origins Harder.

Posted to Paperslip on September 1st, 2025.

See Related Korea Times Article — Published Oct 16, 2021:
What does Korean law say about adoptees' right to information disclosure

Posted to Paperslip on September 1st, 2025:

For years, I’ve grappled with a difficult truth: when it comes to reform efforts around the Right to Origin for Korean Adoptees, sometimes one step forward can mean ten steps back. Since 2018, I’ve been engaged in an ongoing, often deeply frustrating battle to obtain information from my own Korean Adoption Agency, Korea Social Service (KSS). Since 2021, I’ve also supported countless other KSS Adoptees through the painful and complicated process of seeking their own records. Along the way, I’ve often questioned whether some past advocacy efforts—though well-intentioned—may have inadvertently made things more difficult for those of us still fighting for answers.

Hindsight is 20/20—but for Adoptees, that hindsight is often lost to time. With little institutional memory amongst Adoptees themselves, many fail to realize a troubling pattern: every time major reforms are made in the name of progress, the rights of previous generations are quietly bartered away.

This became painfully evident during the Adoptee-led push to revise the Special Adoption Law in 2012. What began as a well-intentioned effort to protect Adoptee rights ended in disappointment when Korean legislators altered the language of the bill at the last minute—effectively undermining Adoptees’ right to origin. I've heard numerous anecdotal accounts describing how, prior to 2012, the search process in Korea felt like the "Wild West," with Korean Adoption Agencies often handing over information freely and without much oversight to Adoptees. However, by the time I came out of the fog and began my own search in 2018—well into the post-reform era—I encountered obstacle after obstacle in trying to access even the most basic information. This shift is, unfortunately, the direct result of the 2012 revisions, which granted Korean Adoption Agencies broad legal discretion over what they could choose to disclose—or withhold.

A similar erosion of rights is happening again with South Korea's recent ratification of The Hague Convention, which stipulates the centralization of all adoption records under the control of a single authority — in S. Korea’s case, the NCRC (National Center for the Rights of the Child). I frankly never understood why some Adoptee activists have always pushed for Korean Adoption Agency files to be centralized at NCRC. I always knew that NCRC taking over our adoption files would be a disaster, given NCRC’s past history of incompetence with respect to file management, which is why I pushed Adoptees for 15 solid months to make requests to their Korean Adoption Agencies before the transfer to NCRC. Unfortunately, as with the amendment to the 2012 Special Adoption Law, there is little else I can do to change history. Adoptees seem to be forced to drink from an ever shrinking watering hole in terms of their Right to Origin.

This is the danger of applying Western models of activism to a deeply entrenched Korean system—one that commodified Adoptee lives under successive dictatorships and has yet to fully reckon with that legacy. The old rules still apply: our right to origin was never acknowledged nor considered important, and in many ways, it still isn’t.

Below, I asked ChatGPT the question, “Did the 2012 Special Adoption Law of S. Korea make it harder for Korean Adoptees to obtain adoption information from Korean Adoption Agencies?” I would never advise relying on ChatGPT answers 100% without further investigation, but ChatGPT’s responses to my question during successive identical queries produced answers that broadly align with my experiences with my own and other Adoptees’ search efforts since 2018. Funnily enough, the ChatGPT responses referred to Paperslip as a source in some instances below.

+

Did the 2012 Special Adoption Law of S. Korea make it harder for Korean Adoptees to obtain adoption information from Korean Adoption Agencies?

ChatGPT said:

Yes — in many important respects, the 2012 Special Adoption Act (formally the Revised Special Adoption Act, effective August 2012) made it more difficult for Korean adoptees to obtain adoption-related information. While the law included provisions that on the surface expanded access, in practice, its implementation often restricted adoptees’ access to their origins.

What the Law Did Provide

  • The 2011 amendment, which took effect in August 2012, introduced several measures, including a waiting period of seven days post-birth before birth parents could consent to adoption, mandatory public family court approval, and creation of a Central Adoption Agency aimed at recording adoption-related data
    Wikipedia
    The Library of Congress.

  • It also stipulated that adoptees could access certain information, such as their pre-adoption identity details and the adoption agency’s contact, and that they could obtain birth parent information with consent. In “special circumstances” (like medical need or if birth parents were deceased or unlocatable), information could be released without consent
    Wikipedia
    The Library of Congress.

But in Practice, Access Has Been Limited and Restricted

Narrow scope & restrictive interpretations

Legal experts and adoptee advocates point out that the law’s provisions remain far too narrow to respect adoptees’ fundamental right to know their origins. For example:

  • Under Article 36 and the Enforcement Decree’s Article 13, adoptees may access only limited information, and access to any broader familial or contextual data is not guaranteed
    Korea Times.

Extremely low disclosure rates

  • In 2018, the disclosure rate of birth parents’ information was a mere 17.2%, with 82.7% non-disclosure
    Korea Times.

  • By 2020, non-disclosure still dominated: 5% refusals, 5% due to death, and a large number of cases where the reason (like “location cannot be confirmed”) remains opaque
    Korea Times.

No appeal process

  • If an adoptee's request is denied, no appeal is possible under the Special Adoption Law — unlike other transparency laws in Korea that allow administrative or legal challenge
    Korea Times.

Agencies’ restrictive practices

  • Adoption agencies and the Korea Adoption Service (KAS) have interpreted the “special circumstances” clause as requiring all three conditions to be met simultaneously (birth parent dead, unlocatable, and adoptee has illness)—a scenario exceedingly rare—rather than just one, as legislation intended
    TRACK
    mobile.koreatimes.co.kr.

  • Agencies have also refused to search for or disclose the existence of siblings, extended family, or foster parents, although government guidelines (via the Adoption Working Manual) did allow for broader searches
    TRACK
    mobile.koreatimes.co.kr.

Fragmented records & lack of transparency

  • Adoption records are scattered among private agencies, and adoptees must navigate multiple institutions with little transparency or coordination
    Paperslip.

  • The lack of systematic, centralized storage until recently made the search process fragmented and often unsuccessful
    Paperslip.

Summary: Did the 2012 Law Make It Harder for Adoptees?

Yes, though unintentionally. While the amended law included improvements such as court oversight, formal record-keeping, and a central adoption agency, its implementation severely limited adoptees’ access to birth information:

  • The narrow definitions and restrictive agency interpretations disproportionately hindered adoptees’ rights.

  • Opaque procedures, denial without appeal, and fragmented record systems further compounded the difficulty.

  • Consequently, many adoptees found their path to truth even more blocked than before.

Looking Ahead

Changes are now underway to address some of these systemic barriers:

  • A 2023 law mandates transferring all adoption records from private agencies to the National Center for the Rights of the Child (NCRC) by July—even centralizing requests for information and searches
    UnionCourthouse News.

  • Starting 2025, a centralized Adoption Records Center will manage records, which should simplify adoptee access—though significant logistical and infrastructural challenges remain
    Paperslip.

+

What would be the scorecard of Adoption reforms for Overseas Adoptees from S. Korea ?

ChatGPT said:

Here’s a focused scorecard of Adoption Reforms in South Korea for Overseas Adoptees, reflecting the latest developments as of September 1, 2025:

South Korea Adoption Reform Scorecard

CategoryGradeRationaleTruth & Accountability
C–
The Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) confirmed human rights violations—including falsified records and non-consensual adoptions—in at least 56 of 367 cases
The Washington Post
Wikipedia.

However, the government has not issued an apology or fully acted on the TRC’s recommendations
Wikipedia.

Legal Accountability & Reparations
D+
Legal actions are underway—for example, a lawsuit seeking damages for a 1975 adoption without consent. But overall progress toward redress and reparative justice is slow and limited.

Transparency & Record Access
C
A 2023 law mandates transferring adoption records from private agencies to the National Center for the Rights of the Child starting July 19th, 2025
The Washington Post.

This centralization promises better access for adoptees, though concerns about loss or incompleteness persist
The Washington Post.

International Oversight – Hague Adoption Convention
B+
South Korea ratified the Hague Convention on June 17, 2025; it will take effect October 1, 2025

This enforces legal, ethical standards, including state oversight, and restricts intercountry adoption to cases where no suitable local family is available

Adoption System Structure & Oversight
B
The government will replace private agencies with a new public adoption system under state and local administration—implementing vetting and matching through a Ministry committee guided by “best interests of the child”
Al Jazeera.

Reduction in Adoption Volume
A–
Intercountry adoptions have sharply declined—from over 6,000 annually in the 1980s to just 58 in 2024—reflecting structural change and reduced dependence on overseas placement.

Support for Cultural Reconnection / Return Visits
C–
Historical cultural programs exist, like heritage visits and special visa statuses
Wikipedia.

But recent reforms have not placed clear emphasis on funding or expanding such support.

Adoptee Rights in Policy-Making
C
Adoptee advocacy played a key role pushing for investigations and reforms
The Washington Post

Yet institutional reforms are largely top-down and lack robust mechanisms for adoptee participation.

Overall Grade: C

South Korea has taken important steps—especially legal reforms, treaty ratification, and structural overhaul—but efforts on justice, transparency, cultural support, and genuine accountability remain incomplete and uneven.

Summary of Key Highlights

  • Hague Convention ratified (effective Oct 1, 2025): Establishes much stronger legal oversight and safeguards for intercountry adoption

  • Government-controlled adoption system replacing private agencies: A move toward state accountability and standardized practices
    Al Jazeera.

  • Centralized adoptee records: Private agency files being transferred to a national center for better access—critical for identity and reunification
    The Washington Post

  • TRC revelations: Documented widespread abuses and fraud in decades of intercountry adoptions, though only a subset of complaints have been resolved
    The Washington Post
    Wikipedia.

  • Legal actions: Individual lawsuits are increasingly challenging past abuses, forcing further scrutiny

  • Adoption numbers: A steep drop in overseas adoptions signals a structural departure from past practice