Abstract
This article investigates the colonialist definitions of the terms “orphan” and “adoption”, contrasting them with how the traditional practice of child circulation in Fiji cared for orphaned children. I examine whether the terms “orphan”, “adoption” or “informal adoption” are equal to (or even appropriate) when describing child circulation practices in Fiji, and whether these terms and practice have had an effect on the status of the child with these labels within their own community.