Content uploaded by Elizabeth Bartholet
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Elizabeth Bartholet on Jan 21, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
Where Do Black Children Belong? The Politics of Race Matching in Adoption
... With the normalization of more family forms and the rise of unplanned pregnancies, adoption was now believed to be the "best solution" for the "problem" of unplanned pregnancies (Melosh, 2002). This discourse infiltrated societythe beliefs held by adoption professionals, lawyers, and caseworkers, in particularand led to an increase in transracial adoptions (Bartholet, 1992;Melosh, 2002). Adoptive families were made more "visible" due to the transracial make-up of the adoptive family. ...
... Adoptive families were made more "visible" due to the transracial make-up of the adoptive family. This turn toward more visible adoptions also sparked many interesting social and political conversations, mostly about how race ought to be handled and regarded in adoption practices in politics (see Bartholet, 1992;Kennedy, 2003;Roberts, 2002). ...
... According to Elizabeth Bartholet (1992), matching did serious harm, was not in the best interest of the child, and violated anti-discrimination statutes in the United States Constitution. To bolster her claims, Bartholet (1992) highlighted empirical studies showing that trans-racial adoptees: (1) scored similarly on social and psychological adjustment to Black children raised by Black parents in similar socio-economic circumstances and (2) developed comparably strong senses of Black identity. ...
The current paper uncovered the pertinent discourses and themes of and about adoption in the United States throughout the following time periods: 1850-1919, 1920-1959, 1960- 1979, and 1980-present. Emergent discourses were placed in their historical context(s) and served to illuminate the conversations and movements that informed prominent adoption discourses, policies, and best practices throughout history. Through illuminating salient discourse and themes of adoption throughout history, a better understanding of how the perspectives that professionals, politicians, practitioners, and social scientists often hold as fundamental have the potential to change over time was afforded. A critical historical analysis provides a foundation for those working in the field of child welfare currently, and adoption specifically, to critically interrogate how their own philosophies, practices, conversations, and policy work may impact the pertinent discourses and themes of and about adoption throughout the 21st century.
... One of the unseen benefits of transracial adoptions is that it helps get children out of the foster care system and into caring homes. Harvard Law Professor Elizabeth Bartholet (1991) argues that the foster system provides no permanency and notes that some foster parents are abusive and unfit parents (p. 1255). ...
... By making transracial adoptions more common and reducing the stigma around race related adoptions, children will have a higher chance of being placed into a family that has the proper means to take care of them. Bartholet (1991) agrees with Fellner and adds that there needs to be more education around transracial adoption so that more people will feel inclined to participate in these types of adoptions (p. 1256). ...
At its best, the adoption system brings families together and gives children a chance at a happy and healthy life; however, as it turns out, like many other systems in the United States, the adoption system is entrenched with systemic racism that may negatively impact a child’s life. In this paper, I examine the following questions: In what ways does the adoption process favor one race over the other? Who is imagined as the parent and the child in a transracial adoption? What has the public’s response been when the parent is a person of color? I first look at scholarship related to transracial adoptions and the arguments around whether transracial adoptions are beneficial for the children. I discuss some deeply rooted problems in transracial adoptions that may have a long term impact on a child’s life. I then outline my research methods, and finally, I discuss the results of my research. Ultimately, I argue that the adoption system, a system that is supposed to bring families together, is unintentionally keeping families apart with its regulations. In addition, I look into how some of the racist undertones in adoption policies have bled into what people imagine a family should look like.
... Training and support for social workers has expanded significantly in the US to address prejudices and stigma (Mallon, 2008). Nevertheless, in some states, adults who are LGBTQ are discouraged from pursuing adoption, and another handful allow private, non-profit agencies to deny opportunities for public adoption to members of the LGBTQ community (Agosto, 2012). 1 Discussions about sexual orientation and its appropriateness for care mirror historical debates about the role of race and transracial placement in the field of adoption (for a discussion, see Bartholet, 1991) and, before that, the role of religion in trans-religious placements (for a discussion, see Pfeffer, 2002). However, Congress effectively ended the debate when they passed the Multi-Ethnic Placement Act 1996, prohibiting states from denying or delaying foster or adoptive placements based on the race or ethnicity of the child or of the prospective foster or adoptive parent. ...
... As a result, minority children were disadvantaged by waiting longer for placements. (Bartholet, 1991;Jennings, 2006;Swize, 2018;Wainwright & Ridley, 2012). ...
Background and objectives
The ‘fit’ or ‘match’ between foster or adoptive children and their carers may be instrumental in determining the outcomes for children and the sustainability of their placement.
Understanding components most likely to produce a successful match will assist professionals to support carer families and place children optimally. This Scoping Review investigated research relating to matching children needing care and adult carers. It sought to understand the extent of previous research, note key areas of matching interest and theoretical trends and identify gaps.
Method
Four databases, ASSIA, CINAHL, PsychInfo, and SocIndex, were searched for references in March 2020. Eligible studies included those that reported explicit or implicit matching elements, children in need of care and systematic data collection and recording. Research quality was not included in eligibility criteria.
Results
The systematic search returned 2802 results. After removing duplicates, eligibility screening and a close reading, only 31 studies published over a period of 81 years were deemed eligible. These studies demonstrate limited scholarly engagement with the concept of matching and changing foci on matching elements that shift from objective features to subjective features, and then to inter-subjective.
Conclusions
The area of matching carers and children is under-researched, fragmented and lacks consistent or rigorous theoretical frameworks. An increased understanding of matching would assist practitioners in child placement and support for adoptive and foster parents. This would contribute to the broader issue of placement sustainability and improved outcomes for children.
In this chapter, I provide an historical background to adoption in Sweden, by placing it in Sweden’s hidden history of colonialism, race science, and eugenics. I begin by summarising Sweden’s colonial history and its pioneering role in race biology. I discuss how the desire to measure and control Other bodies provided the conditions for the study and widespread practical use of eugenics. I use Sweden’s extensive sterilisation programme as an example of how scholarship and political discourse around eugenics led to its practical use by the state to eradicate undesired Other bodies from society.
I then explore Sweden’s post-war reforms that saw the country move from being the home of race science and racism to being regarded as a post-race, anti-racist good nation. I discuss the state-led efforts to distance the nation from Nazism and colonialism, and its reputation—both domestically and globally—as an exceptional nation that stands outside Europe’s racist past and present.
A primary goal of the welfare state is to ensure that children and young people have a good upbringing and that families feel secure. However, several studies indicate that the risk of marginalisation and social exclusion increases, especially among children of low‐income and immigrant families. Why some children seem to be more loosely connected to people and the world around them is poorly understood. Based on a Foucauldian critical discourse review, this article aims to explore the most cited academic discourses on children’s connections to the social and material environment—typically referred to by terms such as “social inclusion,” “social participation,” “social integration,” and “social exclusion.” The main research questions are: What has been addressed in this literature, by whom, and what are the knowledge gaps? Some of the most important observations are that the most influential literature on children’s connections is typically written by psychologists, address children settled in the US, and tends to neglect important explanation factors, such as the material conditions of children’s everyday life. Implications for the (re)production of knowledge and knowledge gaps are discussed.
Legal scholars have engaged in robust discussions of ethics in adoption law, but have paid little attention to the lawyering role in adoption. This article seeks to fill this gap by reviewing the disconnect between ethical obligations as conceived by lawyers’ rules of professional responsibility and societal norms of ethics; and proposes an ethic of care for lawyers that centers the interests of the child. This article draws on Tronto’s four phases of care, and argues that centering the needs of children for continuing relationships leads to ethical adoption lawyering.
This article explores the loss, legacy, and liberatory possibilities of addressing adoption through collaborative autoethnographic writing. We invite readers, through critical autoethnographic narratives and scholarship, to engage with our lived experiences as both cultural and familial histories. The return to the pre-adoption place of origin will not give us the closure we seek, so here we explore the future-making potential of collective adoptee narratives. If home may be less of an origin and more of a destination, each of the four authors engages in this autoethnographic research as a creative and collaborative means of finding a way toward becoming-home.
The purpose of this research was to investigate the efficacy of the difference orientation for interpreting black children's lower average intelligence test performance. This study examines the response styles to cognitive demands of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC) exhibited by two groups of adopted black children, aged from 7 to 10 years at the time of testing, and their average IQ. One group had been adopted by middle-class white families (i.e., transracially adopted), and the second group had been adopted by middle-class black families (i.e., traditionally adopted). A significant difference in the average performance of the two groups of children was observed, favoring those adopted by white families. Multivariate analysis of variance indicated significant differences in the styles of responding to test demands demonstrated by the two groups of black children, which are conceptualized as contributors to the difference in average test score observed between them. Multivariate analysis of the helping behaviors adopted mothers exhibited when helping their children solve a difficult cognitive task revealed significant differences between black and white mothers, which are conceptualized as culturally determined.
National Center for Youth Law; Carol Coccia, President, National Coalition to End Racisin in America's Child Care System Homes For Black Children; Jane Edwards, former Director, Spence Chapin Adoption Service
- Alice Bussiere
Alice Bussiere, National Center for Youth Law; Carol Coccia, President, National Coalition to End Racisin in America's Child Care System; Sydney Duncan, Director, Homes For Black Children; Jane Edwards, former Director, Spence Chapin Adoption Service; Susan Freivalds, Adoptive Families of America;
Open Door Society; Ernesto Loperena Association of Black Social Workers Child Adoption Counselling and Referral Service; William Pierce, President, National Committee for Adoption; Dr
- Carolynjohnson
- Executive
- Director
CarolynJohnson, Executive Director, National Adoption Center; Joe Kroll, Executive Director, North American Council on Adoptable Children; Betty Laning, Open Door Society; Ernesto Loperena, New York Council on Adoptable Children; Phyllis Lowenstein, former Director, International Adoptions Inc.; Leora Neal, Executive Director, New York Chapter of Association of Black Social Workers Child Adoption Counselling and Referral Service; William Pierce, President, National Committee for Adoption; Dr. Alvin Poussaint, Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School;
Adoption Subsidy Program, Massachusetts Department of Social Services; Mary Beth Seader, National Committee for Adoption; Rita Simon, Co-author of one of the leading empirical studies of transracial adoption; Carolyn Smith, Massachusetts Adoption Resource Exchange
- Nancy Rodriguez Supervisor
Nancy Rodriguez, Supervisor, Adoption Subsidy Program, Massachusetts Department of Social Services; Mary Beth Seader, National Committee for Adoption; Rita Simon, Co-author of one of the leading empirical studies of transracial adoption; Carolyn Smith, Massachusetts Adoption Resource Exchange; Peggy Soule, Director, The CAP Exchange;
Transracial Adoption: Analysis of the Best Interests Standard 59
- Howard
Howard, Transracial Adoption: Analysis of the Best Interests Standard 59 NoTRE DAME L. REV. 503 (1984);
Race in Adoption Proceedings: The Pernicious Factor, 21 TULSA L
- O Brien
O'Brien, Race in Adoption Proceedings: The Pernicious Factor, 21 TULSA L.J. 485 (1986);
Race as a Factor in Interracial Adoptions 1022 (1983) [hereinafter Note, Race as a Factor]; Note, Transracial Adoption: A Critical View of the Courts' Present Standards-90) [hereinafter Note, Transracial Adoption]; Note, supra note 163
- Perry
- Note
- Cath U L Law
- Rev
Perry, supra note 17; Note, Constitutional Law: Race as a Factor in Interracial Adoptions, 32 CATH. U.L. REV. 1022 (1983) [hereinafter Note, Race as a Factor]; Note, Transracial Adoption: A Critical View of the Courts' Present Standards, 28J. FAM. L. 303 (1989-90) [hereinafter Note, Transracial Adoption]; Note, supra note 163. This content downloaded from 35.8.11.2 on Wed, 25 Sep 2013 08:33:30 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Sheet Metal Workers Int'l Ass'n v. Equal Employment Opportunity Comm'n, 478
Local 28, Sheet Metal Workers Int'l Ass'n v. Equal Employment Opportunity
Comm'n, 478 U.S. 421 (1986);
noting that controlled sample of adoptees displayed slightly more extreme forms of behavior than non-adopted children). See generally C. Santor, The Biological Link and Its Effect on Adoption as a Viable Family Alternative 1-4
J. PERSONALITY & SOC. PSYCHOLOGY 1051, 1054-66 (1985). But see Brodzinsky,
Schechter, Braff& Singer, Psychological and Academic Adjustmen, 52J. CONSULTING &
CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY 582, 588 (1984) (noting that controlled sample of adoptees
displayed slightly more extreme forms of behavior than non-adopted children). See
generally C. Santor, The Biological Link and Its Effect on Adoption as a Viable Family
Alternative 1-4, 12-34 (1990) (unpublished paper on file with author).