Several solutions have been proposed to address the problem of orphanhood or foundlings, There is the solution through adoption, or the solution through guardianship, Some claim that guardianship is a good alternative to adopting a foundling, because guardianship secures all the benefits of adoption and preserves lineage, In addition, guardianship means voluntary care for a person in need, such as an orphan, a poor person, or a foundling, and includes securing the costs of food and drink, or part of these costs, This is usually done in an orphanage, and not in the guardian’s home, The guardian may also provide some services, such as moral care for the orphan or foundling, Generally, the relationship is between the guardian and the orphanage, where the guardian provides a sum of money to the orphanage,This provision is not subject to continuity as a family duty, and the guardian may stop his assistance at any time he wants.

 Adoption differs radically from guardianship. In adoption, the orphan or foundling becomes a member of the family, with all the implications of this term and all the rights and obligations. The adoptive parents are usually of high moral, material, and social standing. The orphan, or foundling, becomes a member of the family. We are not aware of any religion other than Islam that prohibits adoption. The reason for the prohibition, as is said, goes back to the issue of “lineage.” Adoption was known even before Ibn Abdullah announced the new religion. Ibn Abdullah had an adopted son named Yazid. The story took a turn after the Prophet saw the legs of Zaynab, who was the wife of his adopted son. He saw her during a visit to his son and daughter-in-law, and she was almost naked. He was immediately captivated by her, and the process of divorcing Zaynab from Yazid began immediately to facilitate her taking possession of Zaynab and then marrying Ibn Abdullah. In this process, the angel Gabriel played an important role in conveying divine commands to him!

     There is a strong link between the desire to marry the beautiful Zainab and the prohibition of adoption. The prohibition of adoption represents the removal of embarrassment regarding the theft of other people’s wives, as there is no embarrassment in the theft of strangers’ wives, but the matter was very different from the theft of the son’s wife, as in that environment and that time the theft of the son’s wife was a shameful act.

  The issue of lineage was later linked to the problem of preventing adoption, and the linkage was to remove the suspicion regarding the instinctive sexual matter, which was ignited after seeing Zainab’s legs. Whatever the reasons for preventing adoption and depriving the child of living in semi-normal conditions, we do not find any importance in the affiliation of a child to any person. The importance lies in depriving the child of some lineage, as is the case with a child born as a result of a relationship outside of marriage. This deprivation represents a high degree of crime against humanity, the children of ISIS, for example.

The absence of a surname exposes children in these sick societies to a stigma that accompanies them throughout their lives, This is in addition to other abuses against the girl or boy, such as depriving them of holding leadership positions, depriving them of studying law, and preventing them from practicing the profession of judge, imam, and mufti,The testimony of a foundling or illegitimate child is not accepted in court, and they are deprived of military service, etc, All of this represents a violation of human equality, Equality does not concern itself with lineage, except for the sick society, which is concerned with a person having an organic lineage, i.e., sperm. 

Opponents of adoption argue that a child cannot be left to belong to a family they did not choose, as if the child had chosen their parents, They say that the child will live their whole life deceived if they belong to an alternative family, and this may lead to the destruction of their life, because they cannot easily disown it, Here the following question is raised: Who among us chose their parents? Or chose their race, lineage, or even their religion? And where is the deception in the new lineage issue, which removes the stigma of being an illegitimate child and the stigma of being a foundling?

There is no good in a nation of mercy, nor is there any good in a good nation, that wants with unparalleled brutality and animality to keep the status of the illegitimate son and the status of the foundling attached to a person throughout his life, The saying “Leave them to their fathers is more just in the sight of God” is an irresponsible statement, in addition to it being wrong in its essence and implications, since the angel Gabriel did not realize the difference between parents and fathers,   The father is an organic status, while the father is a social status.

    How will these peoples, religions, and religious governments gain the respect of the international community when the children of these peoples are subjected to inequality in rights and duties due to circumstances imposed upon them? The inequality between the foundling and the one of lineage is the height of depravity, Even the word foundling is full of contempt,Humanly speaking, there is no such thing as a foundling; rather, there is only human beings, regardless of their lineage and ancestry!!!