Iceland review - 2007, Qupperneq 69

ICELAND REVIEW 67
is a mutual recognition: we are the same. What’s more, in the modern
era this dance has been codified into a searchable online database of
genealogical records dating back as far as the eighth century. Dubbed
islendingabok.is, the project is a byproduct of research by biomedical
company deCODE genetics, which essentially purchased the entire
genealogical history of the Icelandic people in 1998 to study genetic
disease in a relatively homogenous, isolated population. The gist is
that Icelanders log in with their national identity number and look
up how they are related to other Icelanders, past and present, which
is somehow endlessly pleasing to the Icelandic mind. Only four
generations away from Björk isn’t bad, but 11 generations away from
Halldór Laxness? Shameful.
This larger sense of interconnectedness, however, tends to work
against identifying as smaller familial units like the conventional
nuclear family. “Compared to other nations, Iceland is not quite
as obsessed with the notion of having a mother-figure and father-
figure,” says clinical psychologist Dr. Thórkatla Adalsteinsdóttir,
who specializes in family therapy. “We are used to having a big
family around the children, with many relatives involved in their
upbringing. Family ties are stronger here. In my family among us
five brothers and sisters there are 17 children, but they are all our
children.”
How the kibbutz envisions the cultivation of land, so do the
Icelanders see the fostering of their familial ties. Naturally, this
inherent societal collectivism gives rise to state policies that support
the family along socialist lines, with a strong emphasis on childrearing.
Maternity and paternity leaves – a minimum of three months for
each parent, plus three months for the two to divvy up at will – are
funded by the state, as are annual child benefit payments.
Unlike the debate in the U.S. over the sacred nature of
marriage in social policy, Iceland seems to be abandoning the entire
institution in favor of unions based entirely on civil law. There is a
growing tendency to forego marriage in the church in favor of civil
marriage or even paperwork nuptials, that is, the state-recognized
“consensual union”. No veil, no rings, no cake here; only a one-page
photocopied application and two dotted lines. According to Statistics
Iceland 10,718 couples have been joined in consensual unions or civil
matrimony in the last five years while only 6,612 couples have been
joined in holy matrimony.
Likewise, attitudes towards same-sex unions and families are
progressive. Registered partnerships, which are performed by state
officiants and equivalent to marriage although not recognized as such
by the national church, have been offered to gay couples since 1996.
However the same tendency toward simple consensual union is also
exhibited in the gay community, with Statistics Iceland reporting 20
gay couples entering into registered partnerships in 2006 compared
with 52 gay couples establishing consensual unions.
Additionally, more recent legislation from 2006 has made gay
couples eligible for primary adoption and artificial insemination
through the state healthcare system, though in the former regard
the law is largely symbolic as no country that puts up children for
overseas adoption accepts petitions from same-sex parents, and
primary adoption within Iceland is almost unheard of. For this reason,
gay couples have had to show both diligence and resourcefulness in
their endeavor to become parents, including lesbians and gay men
joining forces (though not genitals) to conceive through what is
known as heimasprauta or “home insemination”, involving a paper
cup, a needleless syringe, and maybe some candles for a baby-making
mood.
“The children in [same-sex] families are in a good situation
because the parents have invested a lot into having their child, more
so than in families where causal sex resulted in a surprise baby,” Dr.
Adalsteinsdóttir observes. “I know two or three lesbian families, and
they tell me they’ve never encountered any prejudice.”
While prejudice toward same-sex families may be negligible,
prejudice toward outsiders is not, especially those who are
perceptibly different than the f laxen-haired, apple-cheeked natives.
Dr. Adalsteinsdóttir notes that this growing phenomenon presents
certain obstacles to overseas adoptions when it comes to bringing
other ethnicities into the community (with the majority of such
adoptions coming from China, India, and Thailand). “We are
more prejudiced than any other country in Europe because of our
isolation,” she explains. “So it’s a difficult task, but suddenly a very
necessary task. We have to commingle with the rest of the world if
we want to survive.”
There is, however, a reprieve for families adopting “brown”
babies from abroad: Iceland’s overriding and nearly manic impulse to
have children. “We have a positive attitude towards children because
it’s just pragmatism,” explains Dr. Adalsteinsdóttir. “There are very
few of us, and a lot of work to do. ‘The more children, the better’
– we still have that mindset. So when we go abroad to fetch children?
‘Yes! More! More!’”
In this aggressively pregnant nation, filling up the land with
little Icelanders is almost invariably perceived as a boon, even
if the circumstances by which the children are conceived are less
than desirable by outside standards, like young single mothers. If
unplanned pregnancies arise, they are seldom seen as unwanted
and inevitably kept within the family in place of adoption, which
explains why primary adoption within the country is so rare. “There
is a stigma here against people who don’t raise their own children.
We are a former fishing society and women are used to being alone
with our children,” says Dr. Adalsteinsdóttir. “This is our legacy. I’m
not saying it’s good or bad; it’s just our mentality.”
“All happy families are alike; each unhappy family is unhappy
in its own way.” So begins Tolstoy’s story of Anna Karenina,
who searches for truth and happiness in a moralizing world. While
Icelanders may be defying certain ethical conventions of the West,
their bold ventures into familial bliss seem to be paying off. The
nation consistently ranks in the top five countries according to
indicators of national well-being and happiness like the United
Nations’ Human Development Index (#2) or the World Values
Surveys on happiness (#5) and life satisfaction (#7). But statistics
aside, perhaps Icelanders have heeded Tolstoy’s musing by pursuing
happiness not one family at a time, but rather under the ethos of
inclusion as a nation united.
In following are portraits of families emblematic of Iceland’s
current situation, including those who represent a dying breed, those
who have become a staple in the social fabric of the country, and
those who appear to be pioneering the future of the nation’s home.