Advertisement

Oncofertility pp 153-170 | Cite as

Adoption After Cancer: Adoption Agency Attitudes and Perspectives on the Potential to Parent Post-Cancer

  • Shauna L. Gardino
  • Andrew E. Russell
  • Teresa K. Woodruff
Chapter
Part of the Cancer Treatment and Research book series (CTAR, volume 156)

Abstract

The relationship between adoption and cancer may seem distant. Infertility, however, is oftentimes a consequence of cancer treatment, rendering cancer survivors incapable of biological reproduction. For this reason, the growing population of cancer survivors has a distinct relationship with adoption, as it may provide their only opportunity to parent. It is estimated that 1,479,350 men and women will be diagnosed with cancer in 2009. Remarkably, the overall 5-year relative cancer survival rate for 1999–2005 was 66.1% [1]. Since both cancer incidence rates and cancer survival rates are on the rise, the growing population of cancer survivors will likely be faced with the long-term consequences of their disease treatment, including infertility.

Keywords

Cancer Survivor Cancer History Adoptive Parent Adoption Process Prospective Parent 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the Oncofertility Consortium NIH 8UL1DE019587, 5RL1HD058296.

References

  1. 1.
    Horner MJ, Ries LAG, Krapcho M, et al. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975–2006. http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2006/. Accessed July 22, 2009.
  2. 2.
    Rosen, A. Third-party reproduction and adoption in cancer patients. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2005; 34:91–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kleinman, EL. Caring for our own: why American adoption law and policy must change. Columbia J Law Soc Probl. 1997; 30:327.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kreider, RM. Adopted Children and Stepchildren: 2000, Census Special Reports, CENSR-6RV. http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/censr-6.pdf. Accessed June 16, 2009.
  5. 5.
    Bartholet, E. International adoption: current status and future prospects. Future of Children (Adoption). 1993; 3:89–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lovelock, K. Intercountry adoption as a migratory practice: a comparative analysis of intercountry adoption and immigration policy and practice in the United States, Canada and New Zealand in the post WWII period. Int Migr Rev. 2000; 34:907–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sterett SM. Introductory essay. Law Soc Rev. 2002; 36:209–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    UNICEF Social monitor, Innocenti Social Monitors. http://www.unicef-icdc.org/publications/. Accessed June 6, 2009.
  9. 9.
    US Department of State, Total Adoptions to the United States. http://adoption.state.gov/news/total_chart.html. Accessed June 16, 2009.
  10. 10.
    US Department of State, Intercountry adoption. http://travel.state.gov/family/adoption/adoption_485.htm. Accessed July 12, 2009.
  11. 11.
    O’Donovan K. “Real” mothers for abandoned children. Law Soc Rev. Special Issue on Nonbiological Parenting. 2002; 36:347–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kim S, Smith CJ. Analysis of intercountry adoption policy and regulations: the case of Korea. Child Youth Serv Rev. 2009; 31:911–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    O’Halloran K. The politics of adoption: international perspectives on law, policy & practice. 2nd edn. Dordrecht: Springer; 2006.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Richman, K. Lovers, legal strangers, and parents: negotiating parental and sexual identity in family law. Law Soc Rev. 2002; 36:285–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    889 F2d Lindley for Lindley V. W. Sullivan Md. Ray LINDLEY FOR David A. LINDLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, V. Louis W. SULLIVAN, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee. http://openjurist.org/889/f2d/124/lindley-for-lindley-v-w-sullivan-md. Accessed July 14, 2009.
  16. 16.
    Yngvesson, B. Placing the “Gift Child” in transnational adoption. Law Soc Rev. 2002; 36:227–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Johnson, K. Politics of international and domestic adoption in China. Law Soc Rev. 2002; 36:379–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hague Conference on Private International Law. 33:Convention of 29 May 1993 on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption. http://hcch.evision.nl/index_en.php?act=conventions.status&cid=69. Accessed June 29, 2009.
  19. 19.
    Frette V. France #36515/97. http://www.echr.coe.int. Accessed July 10, 2009.
  20. 20.
    Uniform Adoption Act. http://www.law.upenn.edu/bll/archives/ulc/fnact99/1990s/uaa94.htm. Accessed July 10, 2009.
  21. 21.
    Jenista, JA. Special topics in international adoption. Pediatr Clin North Am. 2005; 52:1479–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    US Department of Justice, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), ADA Home Page. http://www.ada.gov/, Accessed July 14, 2009.
  23. 23.
    Children Welfare League of America (CWLA), Court Rules Agencies May Deny Placement Based on Prospective Parent’s Disability. http://www.cwla.org/programs/adoption/americans_with_disabilities2.htm. Accessed July 14, 2009.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shauna L. Gardino
    • 1
  • Andrew E. Russell
    • 1
  • Teresa K. Woodruff
    • 2
  1. 1.The Oncofertility ConsortiumNorthwestern UniversityChicagoUSA
  2. 2.Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern UniversityChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations