The Drama of Match #155

Yesterday, the joyous news of a Chinese adoptee adopted to Sweden finding her birth family was splashed across the Chinese Birthparent Search community.

My first introduction to this announcement was on the Facebook group made and run by Angela Falcao called, “China adoption and DNA.” On this, she made reference to the match, giving credit to two separate Birthparent search organizations:

1. DNAConnect run by the married couple, Brian and Longlan Stuy, along with a board of directors and some adoptee/adoptive parent volunteers and
   
2. Nanchang Project, founded by two white adoptive mothers, Erin Valentino and Faith Winstead, but has since undergone major restructuring to include a litany of adoptees as volunteer coordinators and a co-director.

To the general public, the inner workings of both organizations are pretty well protected. Both have front-facing personas that interact with many of the adoptive families and adoptees via Facebook. These include posts about birth family reunions and posts about searching birthfamilies. There is some mechanism for birthfamily outreach, with varying levels of input from the community. The community is most aware of posters or fundraising to search in a specific area. Then there is the actual DNA collection and stewardship. This is at the discretion of those in charge, not by popular vote of the community. There are a number of DNA databases that have been tried in the previous decade. Among these are Chinese databases, many of which are exclusively CODIS tests (aka, paternity tests) and GEDmatch which use autosomal DNA tests (aka, will match you with anyone in your extended family). DNAConnect has long been a supporter of autosomal DNA tests being uploaded to GEDmatch, a method that has proven effective over the years and has yielded over 100 matches. Despite aggressive pushback from some members of the searching community, almost every major searching organization now utilizes this winning combination (autosomal DNA test and GEDmatch database), or at least claims they do. Much of the “on-the-ground” work in China, concerned with actually contacting the birthparents is unknown to the general public. For instance, I only know that “volunteers” in some way, shape, or form, help to collect the DNA from birthparents. We don’t usually get to come along for the ride of what was said, to whom, and when. Though, we usually learn later and suffer the consequences that birthparents have been lied to about the legality of DNA leaving China, to the benefit of in-China searchers and the detriment of DNAConnect and others.

There are, of course, politics at play. Whether true or imagined, there are many old arguments that resurface like clockwork.

1. “Why can’t we all just get along?” This is a loathsome idea put forth by at least one naive person every day. Tell me you don’t understand the complexity and nuance of birthparent searches without telling me. 
2. “Why should search organizations raise money or charge money in the first place?” Because it costs money to buy DNA tests and ship DNA tests and print posters and…interview birthfamilies and travel to China and…need I go on? Life costs money. I would GLADLY pay $200 in donations for the opportunity to know my birthfamily. Anyone who argues that this should be “free” is willfully blind because the money is coming from somewhere.
3. “In-China searchers are Chinese, therefore they should know best what the Chinese adoption community needs!” No. In-China searchers are predatory and work for themselves. Your needs are secondary.
4. “It is illegal to bring DNA out of China!” I haven’t heard this one in a while, though this rumor was making its rounds two years ago. This is patently false and lawyers have written actual letters refuting this claim. The original confusion stemmed from China outlawing big pharmaceutical companies from reaping genetic material from its people for profit, as they claimed it as a national resource. It has no bearing on personal-use consumer DNA tests for finding relatives.

Timeline of Events

2018 

A birthfather was looking for his birthdaughter (the Swedish adoptee) and contacted Nanchang Project. They provided him with a CODIS DNA test (paternity test).

2022 

Nanchang Project retested the birthfather with 23Mofang, an autosomal DNA test that is available in mainland China and that puts the results in the 23Mofang database. That DNA file was then reuploaded to GEDmatch, but at the time, there were no close relatives to the birthfather.

May, 2023

In May, the birthfather’s brother (this would be the birthuncle) contacted DNAConnect via their Wide-Net search initiative. He was hoping to locate the very same Swedish adoptee, who was still unknown at the time. An autosomal DNA test was collected of the birthuncle and the birthbrother of the adoptee. DNAConnect wanted to test the birthfather again, however, he declined because he felt that the DNA tests he had previously done with Nanchang Project were sufficient.

DNAConnect uploaded the birthuncle’s DNA to MyHeritage (a DNA database founded in Israel that accepts DNA uploads from other autosomal tests.) 

June 22, 2023

In the MyHeritage DNA database, the adoptee from Sweden and her birthuncle had a match. This is the very first match for the Swedish adoptee and it comes from the DNA test of the birthuncle collected by DNAConnect.

DNAConnect contacted the Swedish adoptee to say that while this was exciting, it would be best to see if the birthbrother’s DNA also matched. Family trees can often be complicated and accuracy is important. What if she was a relative of the birthuncle but not the exact relative he thought she was? For this reason, DNAConnect did not immediately announce the match and chose to wait until the birthbrother’s DNA finished the upload process in the MyHeritage database.

DNAConnect also contacted the birthuncle about the match who then told the birthfather that they had likely located his birthdaughter. The birthfather did not understand that Nanchang Project and DNAConnect were two completely different entities and so he alerted Nanchang Project on July 1st, 2023 that his birthdaughter had been found. He did not tell Nanchang Project who his birthdaughter was and so Nanchang Project did not know the identity of the Swedish adoptee. He did tell them that he was talking to Lan (Longlan Stuy from DNAConnect) without understanding that Nanchang Project is a different organization. At this point, the Swedish adoptee did not have her DNA in GEDmatch or in 23Mofang, so her DNA did not match the DNA test of the birthfather that Nanchang Project had collected.

DNAConnect, still in contact with the Swedish adoptee, urged her to upload her DNA to GEDmatch. GEDmatch is considered the holy grail of adoptee and adoptive parent DNA. Despite her personal success at finding family, being in GEDmatch opens doors to find other relatives, like cousins, who might have better luck finding their own birthfamilies if part of that puzzle is solved already. For example, if I happen to match as a first cousin to this adoptee, it becomes infinitely easier to narrow down who my own birthmother is.

To summarize so far: 

DNA of birthfather collected by Nanchang Project is in GEDmatch.

DNA of birthuncle collected by DNAConnect is in MyHeritage.

DNA of birthbrother collected by DNAConnect is pending in MyHeritage.

DNA of Swedish adoptee collected by herself is in MyHeritage where it matched with her birthuncle.

July 3rd, 2023

The Swedish adoptee takes her DNA from MyHeritage and uploads it to GEDmatch at the urging of DNAConnect. Nanchang Project knows that the birthfather has already found his birthdaughter through DNAConnect, as the birthfather told on July 1st one of their volunteers that he has talked to Lan (as in, Longlan Stuy from DNAConnect).

July 4th, 2023

Nanchang Project gets an alert that the birthfather’s DNA test in GEDmatch has now been matched to the Swedish adoptee.

When an adoptee is matched by DNAConnect, Longlan Stuy facilitates a video call between the adoptive family/adoptee and the birthfamily. However, DNAConnect was still waiting for the birthbrother’s DNA to finish processing in the MyHeritage database. In this time, Nanchang project arranged for the birthfather and birthfamily to video call with the adoptee. These screenshots of the videocall were shared with the adoptee’s permission as part of Nanchang Project’s announcement on Facebook that they had made this reunion possible.

Despite knowing that the birthfather was already aware he found his daughter through DNAConnect, it is Nanchang Project who takes public credit for the match on Facebook without acknowledgment of DNAConnect’s role in the initial DNA match and the subsequent match on GEDmatch (by urging the adoptee to put her DNA in GEDmatch). This announcement is made in the form of a Facebook post made on "The Nanchang Project"'s page at 11:08 AM on July 5th, 2023.

-END TIMELINE-

The arguing on Facebook went on for another couple of days. Some questioned why DNAConnect needed confirmation with the birthbrother's DNA when a DNA match was already made. Ultimately, what happened is that both organizations felt invested in the story of this family and wanted a happy ending.

It is simply unfortunate that credit could not be given where it was earned. More than unfortunate, but predictable. As an adoptee, I cannot help but feel so sorry for the Swedish adoptee who did not ask for all this drama.

In this case, Nanchang Project scooped DNAConnect and cried when DNAConnect tried to share facts about the match. Nanchang Project accused DNAConnect of taking credit for the match before they did, but were proven wrong when it turned out the match announced earlier was to a completely different family. It was not until a day later, after all this drama, that DNAConnect finally announced this match on July 6th.

This is a great case study, as it highlights many failings and areas of improvement for our community. First, we learned that Western databases like GEDmatch are great places for DNA matches, as many adoptees are not aware of/do not have access to Chinese databases.  Second, we learn that as DNA reunions become more prevalent, there will be increased overlap between these searching organizations. Already, we are aware of at least four families who have done DNA testing with Nanchang Project and DNAConnect. Lastly, I think we learned that unless you are a part of several Facebook groups, you're going to be sorely confused with you only see a quarter of the story.

Does this mean Nanchang Project is bad? Certainly not! 

Every organization is a sum of its parts. I think at the moment, Nanchang Project is very concerned about image, trying to court the "adoptee vote" by reminding us of all their adoptee volunteers and making the cutest graphics for their Facebook announcements. It's not bad. But I just wish there was more transparency beyond the opaqueness of their Facebook PR. When I donate to Nanchang Project, where do my donation dollars go exactly? They work with in-China searchers and volunteers, which ones? I believe in autosomal DNA being the most effective method, do I get any say in whether this is used exclusively over CODIS testing or will I be at the mercy of whoever happens to reach the birthfamily first? I can register to be a part of a search poster or a news article, but then I am required to use my finding documents which I know for sure have false information about my finding circumstances! Is this a lack of understanding of the real circumstances in Chinese adoption or are these requirements stipulations by Chinese volunteers who often aggressively insist on the exclusive use of these finding documents?

These are questions I have answers to for DNAConnect. They take meticulous accounting of every donation dollar and are painfully transparent about how they spend it. Anyone curious about the DNA collection process need only watch One Child Nation and I know that all of their DNA tests end up in GEDmatch! I know where the DNA ends up because when I log in to my GEDmatch account, I can see the DNAConnect tests up there. It brings me a lot of comfort to know I have access to the database, whereas with some organizations I feel completely at their mercy.

I want ANSWERS. I am not satisfied with the adorable graphics and happy cartoon deer on Nanchang Project's Facebook page. As a consumer, it makes me feel like Nanchang Project has their stuff together when I see their sleek graphic design and font choices. However, when it comes to effective birthfamily matching, I need more accountability and transparency. I don't like the feeling that I am being used as bait for birthparents who I cannot ensure will be treated honestly and fairly.