'I;I{I~ ADJUf3Tiv1E~:rr
OF
r-fl\1\J~ft~~H--I\dCli\.T .. ;-~~.z
t\I?OT?~rn:J)
C~liTI.~I)R.l~1~~
II
A thesis
sub~itted
in
p~rtial
satisfaction of tbe
requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in
With a
Spec!ali/atiu~
in Early Childhood EducAtion
by
.]l!d ·1. t lJ JltY~J r1~L r~ SE: l·ig~~TtB.n.
----
~f.. . . . .... ,.~
...}
~~:- U. ~~:!
5
~.-_·. \) ~/ ,,~~•
... ·::-·
.. ~
The thesis of Judith Ronnie St.; l:Lgrnan
.
:LS
California State University, Northridge
r\pri 1 ~ 197 6
T.An LE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
L
IN'TRODGGTION
Probl<'~rn
Sta:cement of the?;
1
Significance of the Study
Assumptions and L:Lrn.it<ltions
II.
PJ~VIE'\~
OF THE LITERATURE
12
Contributing Factors
Characterist~cs
16
of Adaptive
Couples
Opposition to Transracial
Adoptions
2.8
Follow-up Studies
35
(...' o;.1.c
IIIr
-lus:ton
.
DESIGN OF THE STUDY
Desc~:iption.
of
61
thE~
Design
Re~~earch
61
Sampling Procedure
62
Nethodo!..ogy
63
64
TV,
ANALYSIS OF 'I'HE DArfA
The.~
71
PcpuJ..<'~.tion
"/1
Analysis of Family
(~t1e. g t: 1. fJfiti a_:l_I"t-7. B
79
i.i.l
PAGE
CHi\..PTER
V.
SUFfr1ARY AND CONCIJJS IONS
89
Su.mma:r-y
89
Conclusions
95
BIBLTOGRA.PHY
9B
THE ADJUSTMENT OF TRA.NSRA.CIALLY ADG.FTe:D
c:::n::LDRY.~N
by
J'udith Ronnie Sel:Lgman
Haster of Arts in Educational Psychology
With a Specialization in Early Childhood Educetion
T
1·.97·5·
._,une,
This is an exploratory, descriptive study of the
population included
twenty~four
transracially adopted
children and eighteen of their siblings.
An analysis
of the transra.cially adopted children's fo.m:tly portraits
\vas made to determine the extent to \.vhich these children
see
the~nselves
units, are:
as integral members of theit· fam:Lly
t~mottonally
11
healthy 11 , and are aware of the
raci!!.l characteristics tvhich ·distinguish the
me~mbers
of
Siblings' drawings were analyzed to
-
•
1..
de. tex·m:."l.. ne tue
extent to whi.ch they see the trans-
their family as integra.l
n ...... ~l
u
l"E''l1'}JE"1"'~
..
and to measure their
o-F t·'·'""
-f.,m;l'l;"
_J.l-....... .....
<-\.1 ,.~,.., -Y un1.· t ,
.1_.
-..
awareness of the racial characteristics distinguishing
.
t:he
b<;rs o f eac.h f':am:.t.~1y.
A questionnaire was
rnr~n·,
·~,
developed to provide additional information about the
trant-:racially ad!:lpted cbiJ.dren and their families.
The
questiannair2 explored the areas of the childrenrs
R\.V-H.:cerlc~ss
_anCi Ut1c\et:·standit:t.g o.f phys:tc.a.l di.ffe:eences
.
1 ,.
among family me,mber.s, problems enc:t)l111terec
J..n the
neighborhood and at school and how these were handled,
and the extent to I.<>Jhich parents a'i:e
h.t-':' lping
their
and
The data analysis showed that transracially
edopt.::ed children
~ee
themselves as integral 'lJ;embers of
their families and that theLc siblings
them as such.
to
br3
~-d.so
perceive
Transracially adopted children appear
emotionally "healtbyn.
Parents indicated their
children's mvareness of distinguishing racial characteristics, and this was reflected in the children's
portraits,
The problems encountered by these children
appear to be minor and generally handled easily.
Parents are actively helping their children identify
with their minority background.
vi
CHi\PTER I
INTRODUCTION
Statement of the Problem
FJ.nding a home for every child who needs one has
al%•ays bie;en the goal of adoption agencies.
These
agencies, however, have always been faced with a
shortage of adoptive homes for minority .and mixed ra(::e
children~ and have consequently labeled these children
as "hard to place" or as "children t-Jith special needs 11 •
Agencies made intensive efforts in the mid-to-late
1960 'B to rec:cuit more minority homes for these "hard
to
place~r
children in their care.
M'1et1 such efforts
did n.nt produce a sufficient number of homes, adopt:tc:m
agencies turned to the practice of transracial adoption,
the placement of minority and mixed race children with
white faro.:Llies.
The 1968 edition of the Ch:Lld vJelfare
League of America standards for adoption included the
t> tat<=:rnent that
I!
'racial background in itself should not
detenn:i.ne the selection of a home for a child 1
l!
(1 ''· p. .)c.) .
J'
Hy 1973:; the Child W'elfare League of America had
revised i t:s position.
lfhile s ti 11 recognLd.rrg t:ea.nsn.1eans
1
2
minority children, the Letigue stated that
'in todayts social climate, children
placed in adoptive families with
similar racial characteristics can
become more easily integrated into
the average family g~oup end community' (15, p. 5).
The practices of adoption agencies quickly reflected the
new stance of the Child \'lelfare
LeagtH~
of America, and
the number of transracial placements declined rapidly.
The radical change in the position of the Child
\•Jf.!lfa:te League of America appears to have been the
din~ct
result of a campaign by the National Association
of Black. Social Workers to halt trans racial adoptions.
The Association, at its Fourth Annual Convention :Ln
1A
...
prJ.' 1L? 1°7"
:J. L., wen t.: on r·e·cord
_ __
aR
~
being
If
'in
vehernc~nt
opposition to the practice of placing black children
with white families' " (11).
Furtherruore, the Associa-
tion pledged to "educate and 'prod' public and private
child
~ve.lfare
agencies to 'cease and desist' the trans..,
racial placement of children" (11).
the
carr~aign
~Jorkers
The final
efft.:~ct
of
by the National Association of Black Social
':·Jas a virtual halt to the placement of all non-
whi.te children with white families.
The Association contended that transracial adoptions
present
11
'a growing threat to the preservation of the
1 '" f:··.;,··n.;l~r'
h"l.""
a..1 Ct ~- r-...
~-~ c~t _ .L..
J
11
(11)
&
..
'"
Black children, and indeed all
minority children) would grow up lacking the appropriate
')
.)
dr~veloped by
racial nidentity", which ca.n only be
among those of one's or,m
ract~.
living
Tr:ansraciall.y adopted
""
It
grow1ng up
ch:tldren \•Jould feel "out ot""' place
e
famiJ..t,es and
communities~
tvhich ;;;ould automatically
view them as minority children.
Other children in the
thei:t~
siblings.
This~
"different-
in
racially adopted children to fe61 that they were not
i.n.tegrc1l members of the family,
The National A.ssociation of Black Social t-Jorkers
believed that transracially adopted children would be
exposed to prejudice and to racial incidents. "''ith wh:Lch
theiJ::" \vhi.t.:e parents would be unable to cope.
parents would not be attuned to
These
problems and fee 1-
ings of minority people because they have never been
exposed to the prevailing prejudices of our society.
Since they have never had to deal with such problems,
they
·~·:ou.ld
be unable to guide their children in bandl-
ing situations arising from their racial backgrounds.
Transracially adopted children would be unable to cope
with prejudice against mtnor:i.ties because they would
not have had minority parents to teach them how to deal
with the larger society.
children
~·Jould
Finally, transracially adopted
.lose their heritage because white
families could not instill the necessary pride in, and
1prn~lp~ap
"\.. .... t\... '"'\' .... ..... u. 0 -
oF
.A.._,
~~a
~...J ..h...
c..~~~ldren
... .t.! .k
,.x
1
s
tn~r-lOrity·
~
.... ...
0 ¥tJUrldc
bftck
a... t_,.J...
_
.
o
~-.
.:.i
Tbou.s.z.nd.s of minority and mixed race childr.en have
been. placed in <ibi te nomeG.
Thousands more re.m.ain :Ln
foster homes because tl1ere is an 'i.nsuffie:Lent n.umber of
homc~s
m.ino:d.ty
av.::iilable and bce.t1uss adoption .ggencles
very
ments.
fe~.;
transracial place·-
The preaent study represents an initial
exploratory inquiry into the adjustment of transracially
adopted crdld:L'er1.
soc.~Et::Lon
The contention of the Nat:Lonnl As··
o:E Bl<1.c!( Soc:ial
~·Jorkers
is tbat transracia.l
Their position is
an err:..otional otw, not based in any way upon empirie.al
Through the analysis of children: s
parent questionnaires, this study
att:empts to shed some light on the consequences of tra.ns .. ·
racial adoption.
It is focused on the children 1 s place
\.vi thin the family, the types of problems which fnmilies
hs.ve encountered and how they have been hand led, and
the extent to which families are attempting to help
their transracially adopted children identify with
their minority background .
.S!BE:i:.~.~.£.?-E..~~ ~.f _She .~.c!Y
The significance of the study is found in the fact
that it explores an area in which little
been done.
resea1~ch
has
The majority of transracial placements were
made in the late 1960 1 s, and until recently the children
have Deen too young to study in a meaningful way.
It is
emotional, psychological, and educational development of
and
~ixed
race children in need of permanent homes, it
to i.nclicate whether
...
transrac1a1
'
.
aaopt~ons
1
l
are successru 1 ancl wnetler
~
t•
Wtllte
fam:Ll:Les can provide e. nurturing, supportive! 1 and lov:Lng
environment for these .children.
Assump·i::Lons ____
and,.,. Limitations
....,..,..,.__,...,___
"'
~~,--,.......,_...-
The following assumptions are made. concerning tbe
'"''-·:
,~.;....
at.;.J.'···
· t .come
·
pa.· ted
~
ou
1.
.c:
o.~...
+-1
... 1e s•t·.t."d\y.•
Transracially adopted children see
themselves as integral members of their
families.
2.
Siblings see transracially adopted
children as integral members of the:tx
fami.lies.
3,
T1.·ansracially adopted children
Hl"e
emotionally !lhealthy 11 , as determined
. c f .. t h e~r
. r.:amL.-Y
,.
'1
d rawb y an ana 1ys ~s
ing:;.
4.
Transracially adopted children are
a'mlre of the racial d.ifferc:H!ces
bet~veen
themselves and other members of thr.::L:
responses to a questionnaire.
racial characteristics between transracially adopted children and other
the drawings of both transracially
adopted children and their siblings
through their use of embel1:tshment.s.
6.
The problems tvhich the
trans~
racially adopted children have
encountered in the neighborhood
ture, i.e. have not produced major
psychological trauma.
7.
. "! adopted children
'r ransr8.C1.<?-:.ls_y
~
and their parents have been able to
deal with
whatevc~r
problems have
arisen,
8.
Parents are actively helping
their transracially adopted children
identify with, and learn
about~
their·
minority heritage.
The:ce are a number of limitations inherent in this
S t... •·•·:lv
\.,..\ ........ "
•
•
J
1"1~e pr1nc1pa.
~
• •
•
1~m1tat1on
re 1.atea t o the ex-
ploratory nature of the study. -It is not an
7
11
exps:rimentn.
There are no ;:·arrdom samples, no cxpe:r..·i-
mental or c:ontrol groups.
educ;:tt::Lcmal-psychologi.cal
The 1ne.thodology of the
c~xper:l.men.t
propriate in this instance.
.,
d- 'DY
cHnnot be ennance
significance.
u.;::-tnR
_..._ ~.
1~e
is thus not ap-
analysis of data
tests of statistical
Simple tabulations must suffice.
Despite the establishment of criteria. by -v;hicb to
evaluate the children's family dre.\vings, a certain
aruotmt of subjectivity remains in the evaluc:ttion pro-
cess.
The evaluater must m.9.ke
som.e
judgments as to
tvhether or not a child 1 s drrH-.7ing m~:.ets a particular
criter:ion.
Furthermore 5 while artistic ability i.s an
un:lmpo1:-tant concern of this study, children who cannot
draw well will have difficulty in adding distinguishing
features to family members.
This may inhibit a child's
ability to indicate racial differences.
.....
r:~na .;.y,
the
1"~
results of the questionnaire will depend on the
willingness of parents to be open and honest.
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF. -.. THE LITEHATURE
-.-.--c~·-
---.--~....-------...-
The "Children 1 s Charter", approved in 1930 by the
\<f.'l:tte House Conference on Children and Youth, states
that every. child has the ri.ght to a home, and the lovE!
artd security .,;qhich a home can provide.
Starting ':.vith
the basic insights of Sigmund Freud, psych:Lntt.·:i.sts,
psychologists, and educators have demonstrated the
importance of family ties, and the inherent dange:(.'S
of maternal depr.ivation.
Hence, the basic a.:Lm of
adoption agencies has always been to find homes for
children who have none.
li~~!?ri£at f~rspectives
t·4'bi le adoption agencies -v;;ere established to provide
for children without parents, they have been limited by
the resom:cE':'!S and con.cerns of the community, and ha•le
tended to reflect its values.
Traditionally, our
society has viewed adoption as a substitute for
natural parenthood.
Parenthood has typically been
defined in terms of physical reproduction, and
this point of view has been underscored by the facts that few fertile
couples expressed interest in
8
0~option!
i~d.agencies routinely
11sted scerll1ty ... as an
,. ,b"l"
f.
'
e-1g1
1 1ty f actor .-or
adopt1on
applicants (12, p. 95).
Thus, adoption agencies became the mean.s for providi.ng
";;m heir to a family that othenv1.1:1e would not havE:
not t.o provide a home for a ch:Lld" (27, p. 24).
focus of the agencies vJas no longer on
11
one~-
The
findi.ng homes
for parentless children, but on finding children for
childless couples 11 (25, p. 68) .
In addition to defining parenthood in terms of
producing biological children, our society has placed
heavy emphasis on family resemblance.
Hence, adoption
agencies have typically attempted to "match" adoptive
children with adopting families.
In the late 1930's, vJhen there -v;rere
many children but not many available
homes, stress was placed on finding
a perfect infant, and one who would
most closely fit the physical
characteristics of the adopting
family. An effort ~vas made to
match ethnic background, skin color,
and intellectual potential (2, p. 145).
N:atchi.ng •:vas necessary
in order to insure the acceptance
of the child into t.he family,
(and thus agencies tended to place)
only those children tvho were free of
problems and handicaps, free of
unknowns or questions regarding their
background, and certainly free of
major differences in racial background
and appearance (17, p. 16).
Following World War II, adoption grew in
10
popularity, and the supply of available infants began
to decrease.
Emphasis vms then placed on finding the
'pe1:'fect 1 adoptive home:. vJhite
parents, almost exclusively,
legally marric~d, devou:t, res pee ted
in the COlTL.rmmity, and prosperous,
but childless. Thus, the adoption
stereotype remained - the 'perfect 1
baby going to the 'perfect' home
(2' p. 14-5).
This att:ttude meant that the children -.-vho were adopted
v1ere nlike the people \vho applied for adoption.
Children v.Jho were different remnined in foster care 11
p. 3).
The supply of
11
perfect" adoptable infants has
decreased significantly in recent years as a result of
the widespread use of contraceptive measures, liberalized
abortion laws, and the decision by a great many white
mothers to keep their out-of-wedlock babies.
At. the
same time, there has been a rapid increase in the
number. of "hard-to-place" children, the majority of
whom are non-o;;.;rhite.
Non-\vhit.c children are those
known not to have two Caucasian parents, and include
those of Black, Indian, Mexican, and Oriental
grounds.
back~
According to the American Ac9-demy of
Pediatrics, the number of non-white children needing
honK::s
today :i.s approximately 40,000.
Fifty percent
of these non-white children are racially mixed.
11.
Adoption agencies attempted to deal with this
problem by evolving new and aggressive techniques for
recrniti.ng more minority adoptive parents for the
'tvhite children awaiting homes.
non~
However, the increased
number of minority applicants was not sufficient to
Dr. Judd Mar:nor 1
1nee t the gro'i.:ting needs in thi.s area.
clinical professor of psychiatry at USC cited the
example of Ne..;,; York City t:vhere, in 196LJ.> over fifty
percent of the children needing homes Nere blacl<.
in most of the
City'~
Yet
adoption agencies) placements
with black families barely reached ten percent of the
a bae•"'r·1
...,~.,~............. est
"-
t:.:
rot'"l
~
r~
')1"'"E''...,C'1'·o
J_ ...... c;........, ~!~~. t. Lu
6
Similarly, a study in the
San F:t"anci.sco Bay area revealed that
11
while there \·Jere
seven applicant couples available for every Caucasian
child, there were ten to twenty minority group children
for every available applicant couple 11 (23, p.
TI:te Child Helfare League of
America~
1.).
i.n a recent
survey of its participating private agencies, stated
that
· 'At no time have sufficient non-white
homes been approved to accommodate
the non-white children accepted (for
adoption), and in the last period,
July-Dec., 1972, the ratio was 59
homes per 100 children 1 (29).
The Child Welfare League of America 1 s survey of public
adoption agencies shm.ved that, during this same
period~
these agencies approved 108 white adopted homes for
12
every 1.00 vJhite
children~
but only 50 non-white homes
per 100 non-white children.
I~ague
In a 1974 survey, the
reported that
'the recent stability of non-white
homes is somewhat discouraging:
1.t:
has varied from 57 to 59 homes per
100 children ... , even lower tha~
during the three earlier periods of
the series (begun i.n 19 71), wl:en it
ranged bet~rJeen Jl.j. and 85. Recruitment of non-vlhite homes has a long
way to go to match or exceed the
number of non-white children ac-·
(15, p. 235).
cepted (for adoption)'
!E.~_t}.~ r ?~c:.i.?J. Ad'op t i or>~~
The discrepancy between the number of non-vJhite
'
c h 1.. J_oxen
available for adoption and the supply of
potent:Lal homes has created problems for adoption
agencies, and has presented psychological hazards for
the children who remain in their care.
Perhaps the
most controversial method of finding homes for these
children has been transracial adoption, the placing
of non-white children with white families.
wn:U. e
the
subject of transracial adoption has received a great
deal of: publicity during the past few
.~n
ent:Lre ly nmv approach to adoption.
years~
it is not
"Children of mixed
racial origin have ... been placed t-Jith -;vhite applicants
for years, generally with those who were regarded as
being of
m~rcginal
eligibility" (23s p. 3).
These '.vere
people who did not meet such adoption eligibility
13
rcqui:cem:::nts as age, religion, res ide nee, or income 1 or
who would be di.squq;lified for personality difficulties.
"Their rs;quest.s (for a non-white child) usually do not
expr.e~us
...,.Jhat they really vJant 11 (10, p . .2).
knong the earliest of the transracial adoptions
were the intercountry adoptions.
The influx of
military person.ne 1 to Ja.p.:m, Korea, and
latc~r
~nerican
Vietnam
and Thai land, led to a s ign.ificant rise in the number of
illegitimate births in these countries.
In Oriental
cultures, the child is considered to be the responsibility of the father.
Hence, mixed race children are
thoug}H: of as An;erican, and are subjected to extreme
prejudice.
are considered 'unpersons', not
worthy of notice" (21, p. 159).
Thus these children
are usually neglected and abandoned as a result of their
mixed racial backgrounds as well as their illegitimacy.
Young American military couples stationed abroad for
long periods, and deprived of the opportunity to adopt
children in the United States because of their mobility,
began to adopt these half"·American orphans.
Couples in
the United States who were unable to adopt children
locally, and who were "conscious of the publicity given
to the plight of the hon1e less and needy children in
numerous countries, began to adopt·chi1dren on the
~v-orld
market 11 (Lf., p. 35).
The Federal government aided
in these transracial adoptions by exempting \rarious
minority group children from the
According to a Harch 25,
qtmt:as.
nm~mal
197!~
immigration
Brtic le in
I...i!E£.,
"2 000 Korean children have been adopted in the United
,j . ,
States since the end of the Korcau_ War, as '"vell as 1, 300
Vietnamese childr-en between 1965 and 1973.
Several
hundred Vietnamese aad Thai chi ldl.'C:n were adopted in
1974.
An additional 2, 000-2. ~ 500 Vietns.mese \vere
'
d· H!
.
1975 following the fall o£ South Vietnam.
anopte
Tlms, while transrac:lal adoptions are not recent
in origin, the
consc~ous,
agenc:Lef:: to recruit
~vhite
is a very new development.
organized efforts of adoption
homes for non-white children
The Children's Service
Centre of Hontreal became the pioneering agency in the
field of transracial adoptions.
In a 1958 survey
of children in its care, the Centre found that it had
170 black or part-black children, 131 of whom were
legally adoptable,
A vigorous campaign tvas launched~
involving leaders of the black community, to acquaint
black families 'tvith the need for adoptive homes for
these children.
However, the black
community as a whole shm•7ed some
resentment that they should be ex·~
pected to shoulder the full responsibility for the future of these
children who were, in most cases, of
mixed white and Negro parentage (28).
Since
fe:';';
black adoptive homes were found, the Centre
decidr.::d to seek \-Jhite families for the black and
part-bl.:-1ck children, as well as some children of
Oriental and Canadian Indian background.
From the
list of v1hite families 'ivai.ting for white child:cen,
the agency found three families vvho agreed t:o take non·white children.
In 1959 ~· the three coup 1es \iho had adopted
transracially formed an organization called the Open
Door Society.
The aim of the group was to aid the
Cer1t:re in finding additional homes for all children
needing homes,. regardless of the racial background of
either the child or. the adoptive parents.
The Open
Doo:c Society launched a massive publicity campaign, and
as
c:~
result, the Children's Service Centre received many
inquiries from interested families.
Hhile the agency
was processing the applications, prospective adoptive
parents met with members of the Open Door Society, who
discussed their experiences in adopting across racial
lines, and answered any questions the applicants had.
It was felt by the Centre that it was easier for
prospective adoptive couples to speak freely with
other adoptive parents than with a professional social
worker.
Through this joint effort by the Children's
Service Cent:re and the Open Door Society> the agency
placed
eo
black chtldren and 50 wholly or partly
Indirm or Or:tentu 1 children with white families Hi thin
four years.
Today, the Open Door Society 9 with branches
and affiliates throughout the United States and
Canada, continues in :Lts attempts to create interest in
the plight of non-white children needing homes, and
operates on the premise that "every child bas the right
to a home, and somewhere there is a home for every
'h. "'dl'
Ct.l.!.
l '
,,..8) •
(.L
At the same time that the Children's Serv·ice Centre
w·as beginning i t:s search for vJhite families for ncn-
vJh::Lte children, the American Indian Adoption Project
v1as launched.
The Project was a joint program of the
Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Ch:tld vlelfare League
of
Ame~,:·ica.,
the League.
and under the d :Lrec tion of Arnold Lys lo of
Homeless Indian children ht:..ve tradi-
tional1.y been passed from family to family on the
reservation, placed in foster homesJ or sent to federal
boarding schools.
Primarily due to the lack of
facilities for finding families, the adoption of
Indian children has not been widespread.
w:i. th Louise
~tJise
Working
Services of Ne<;v York City and the
Children ''s Bureau of De lav1are 1 the Project placed 30
American Indian children '{vith non- Indian families
during the first two and a half years of its operation.
With the examples of success of the American
Indian. Adoption
Project~
and particularly the
17
f'h-j1
c
v ... .i ··~ .... (-i-_...8,:,
--- J....
t... I ...-.:
<::erv-icc.
._.,....
,
.A..
t~
f'c•nt'··e .
'-J
.,
..t.
-- ,.
·otl·la·L·.,
.c
1 o·pt·l()rJ
'"l·~
r::L
.1- •
•
agencies
begah to•give serious consideration to the idea of
actively recruiting white families for non-white,
prin1arily black, chi ld·cen.
Harmor, citing Harriet
Fricke, Case Director for the Lutheran Children's
to tvm major
factors cont:t:ihuting to this sign:Lficant dev<:-: 1.opment.
The first was the "unlikelihood of recruiting a
su£f:Lcient nurriber of Negro fam:LLi.es for the waiting
Negro ch:Lldren 11 , and the second was the
11
beli12f that
it was better for children to be adopted by parents
of another race tbc:m to grow up in foster care"
(23, p. 3).
Harmer considered three additional factors to be
of importance in accounting for agencies' encouragement
of white families to adopt interracially.
F:trst of all,
tbfjre vuts the "growing awareness that foster care is at
best a poor substitute for the sense of belonging to a
"'P"'Cl
c.•c
t.. ..
.1..
.L ~
li.J
'
""et of
l:"
parc.r~ts·"
~ 1 .
~
Secondly, there was the
nconviction that any child t-vho is capable of benefit-
ing from home life is theoretically adoptable if a
su:Lt:ab le family can be found".
11
Finally, there was the
changing social scene in America in the area of race
relations with the emergence of a broadly-based demand ...
for an end to segregation and discrimination'' (23, p. 3).
18
The factors cited by Fricke and Narmor to explain
adoption agencies' efforts to attract white families
non-~hite
for
children would suggest that transracial
adoption is not viewed as valid in itself.
It would
appear that non-white children are placed with
mino1·ity homes available, and
becaust~
whitE.~
social workers
have come to realize that foster home placement is a
poor solution to the problem.
Clayton Hagen.
Supe:t~·Jisor
Thus, according to
of the Adoption Unit of the
Lutheran Social Sc=rvice of Minnesota, transracial adoption is "regarded as vibat
~Je
h8.ve to do to find homes
for minority race children, or as better than foster
homes" (25, p.
l~).
It is seen as a last resort.
Speaking at the First International Conference
(>n
Nixed Race Adoptions, Hagen stated his belief that
transracial adoption is valid in itself, and can stand
on its
o~;.;n
merits.
One need only accept the "commitment
to give every child the opportunity to have parents"
(27
<
'
p. 22 .,'.
Every child deserves the chance to
develop the positive self-image which living in a good
family, regardless of its racial background, can provide.
Hagen suggests that if transracial adoption is
considered "in terms of basic adoption, not a different
kind of adoption, we will consider the interracial
aspects more appropriately" (27, p. 24).
19
To do this, Hagen believes one must first transcend
the cultural attitudes which have equated childbirth with
Adoption is a valid r:vay to be a parent if
one considers nuture to be the basic purpose of the
family.
One must be able to
accept the autonomy of the child
as a separate human being, and to
see his (the parent's) own function
to provide opportunities for this
person to develop and find his own
place in the world ... (27, p. 26).
If this concept of parenthood can be accepted, then
... a child does not need to be born
to the parent ';o.>ho calls him son. He
does not have to look like him or
have similar interests or personality.
It is not necessary that a child and
parent be of the same race.. . Tl1e
parent's function remains the same for
any child, to provide opportunity for
the child to discover what that world
is li.ke .•. , to find his own place in
it, and to see himself and others as
individual persons of worth and
value •.. (27, p. 26).
Regardless of whether one subscribes to the views
of Fricke and Marmor, or to those of Hagens as to the
underlying reasons for advocating transracial adoption,
the fact remains that many non-'tvhite children who could
look forv1ard to nothing more than a lifetime of foster.
ca.re, have found permanent homes.
Unfortunately, few
statist:Lcs are available on the total number of transracial adoptions in this country.
A survey by Op-
portunity showed that one fourth of all black and
part-black children ••.rho
white families.
~qy
adopted in 1968 went to
In 1971, one third of these children
went to white families.
\•?ri.ting :Ln
~.vere
Accordin.g to Steve:n Norris,
magazine, 15,000 black children had
white parents by 1973.
Accoiding to a 1954 survey by the United States
Chi.ldren's Bureau, the most frequently mentioned motives
tor
rl
•
a~opt1on
•
1.uaec
' 1.1nrert1-~ty,
,.
'J'
love of children, and
1nc
a desire to complete a family.
In 1963, Grace Gallay,
a social worker engaged in research at McGill
University~
examined the records at the Children's Service Centre,
of 100 white appl:Lcants for
wished to determine
~v-hether
non~·tvhite
children.
She
the motivations of such
couples differed from those of traditional adopting
couples.
Gallay found that 73% of these 100 applicants
mentioned "the desire to be of service to a child" as
their primary reason for requesting a non-white child
( 13' p. 250) .
Gallay also found that 60% of the applicants
already had a natural child, and 6% had an adopted
vJbite e:hild.
Other researchers ha,Je supported this
finding, that it is primarily fertile couples \•7ho adopt
transracially and infertile ones who adopt in-racially.
Ethel Roskies, in a study of transracial adoptions in
Montreal, found that only 20% of the transracially
adopting couples \-';rere
infertile~
as compared to 7 5% of
the in-racially adopting couples.
The American Academy
of Pediatrics referred to research showing that 70% of
the couples who adopted across racial lines already had
a cb:U.d :Ln their home, as compared to only 32% who had
adopted a vJhite child.
Once adoption agencies were able to accept the fact
that
~~ny
fertile couples wished to adopt children for
sound, humanitarian reasons, they began to allow these
families to apply.
This decision Has based on the
premise that permitting such couples to adopt would
increas(~
the number of much-needed homes, as we 11 as on
the realization that natural and adoptive parenthood
tvere not necessarily incompatible.
These fertile
couples eventually became known as the ' 1 room-for-onemoreu families, and were found to differ markedly from
the traditional adopting couples.
As Fricke has pointed
out, traditional adopters wish to adopt because they need
children.·
Furthermore, because they are denied
the satisfaction of reproducing themselvesr these couples wish to adopt
children similar to themselves;
minimally this includes the desire
to adopt children of their own race
( 12' p. 96).
.
Room-for-one-more adopters, on the other hand, by
virtue of their fertility, wish to adopt because they
22
thc~7 hav~ ha.d and c;an have
the sat1sfact1on ot reproduc1ng
themselvesj these applicants comfortably can encompass adopting
children different from themselves,
And s :Ln<;-e
including youngster.::> of another
race (12, p. 96).
HO{\Tever, there arc-! also infertile couples who adopt non-
v.1hi.t:e children.
"These families have resolved their
feelings around infertility, and in addition, felt that
adoption was acceptance of difference ... ~~ (3, p. 5).
Laurence F'alk, AE:socia.te Professor of Socio?logy and
Social Work at Concordia College, conducted the most
thorough research into the characteristics of families
who have adopted acrot-.:s racial lines, as compared with
those vJho have adopted children of their own race.
His
subjects x.1ere all Caucasian couples v1ho had adopted
children in ten upper Midwestern states, through nineteen different state and private agencies.
His sample
included 186 couples v7ho had adopted transracially
(TRA) and 170 couples who had adopted in-racially (IRA).
Th2 couples in each group were paired according to the
population of their residential cominunities. the age
of the adopting mother, the age of the child at the time
·of placement, and the year t:-Jhen the placement was made.
Because of the agencies from wh:Lch the sample was
drawn, 60% of the couples in both groups were Lutheran.
The chi.ldre.n vvho had been adopted by the TRA families
23
included 73 black or black-Caucasian, 111 Indian or
Indian-C~ucasian,
8-0riental or Oriental-Caucasian, and
13 children with other racial mixtures.
All participants
in the study completed a mailed questionnaire containing
both multiple choice and open-end questions.
The study reve.s.led that while 65% of the TRA
bus~
bands bad at least some college training, only 43% of
th,~
IRA :.HJsbands had such an edu::::ation.
There were 27%
'·more college graduates among the TRA bus bands.
Fifty-
on2 pc?rcent of the TRA husbands held professional jobs,
as comp.:.i.red to 36% of the IRA husbands.
In attempti.ng to measure the social distance of
both g:coups from their families, Falk found that those
couples who had adopted interracially were considerably
t~ore
independent of their families.
Seventeen percent
more of the TRA husbands, and 15% more of the
wives~
lived more than 100 miles from their parents, as compared to IR.A couples.
Determining hmv often the
adoptive couples visited their parents was another
method of measuring social distance.
It was found that
18% fey-.1er TRA husbands and 23% fevmr TRA wives visited
Hith the:tr parents one or more times a month.
it :Ls important to remember that
physical distance is itself an
inhibiting factor in visiting,
(and) one could find differences
simply because T~\ couples are
more d-istant geographically from
However,
their families than·are IRA
couples (8, p. 84).
A more accurate measure of the social distance of
the adoptive couples from their families was how their
I
parents felt about the adoption.
Hhile tbe. majority of:
both groups indicated positive attitudes by their
parents~
the IRA group :.ccceived significantly higher
approval of their adoption.
Other relatives were also
na.wh more approving of the IRA adoptions..
Thus, not
only \-vere the TRA couples more soc:i.ally distant from
their parents, they were more isolated from their other
k:tn a.s 1:ve 11.
Information was also obtained on the extent of
community involvement of ·both groups.
It vms found that
both TRA husbands and wives spent more hours per week in
voluntary organizational activities than IRA couples.
higher percentage of IR.l\ couples attended church and
held ehurch offices.
Among the TRA wives) 19.4% were
employed outside the home, as compared to 11.8% of the
Falk's study bore out previously discussed
theories relating to motivations for adopting a child.
IRA couples adopted because they desired a child and
\<Jere infertile.
Only 32% of this 'group already had a
child in the home.
Doctors and counselors were
mentioned as being the most
i.nflm~n.t:i..al
people in the
A
In the TRA group, 70% of
the cot!ples already had a child in the home.
They
adopted because they perceived the child's need for
parents~
h;y
,.
and thus were most influenced in their decision
.
pul~~catlons
1
d
an~
...
f
.
.
.
puo11c1cy
·rom. aaopt1on
agenc1es
,~
describing the plight of the
non~white
ehilclren.
Friends played a strong role in the decision of
couples in both groups to adopt, but were particularly
influential for IRA. couples.
Ninety percent of the IRA
couples indicated that they had a friend "t-7ho had adopted
a child.
F'ifty-thre(~
percent of the TRA couples stated
that they had a friend who had adopted across racial
lines.
The random chance of having a
friend who has an adopted child
of another race is almost infinitely smaller than the chance
of having a friend with an adopted
child of one 1 s own race. Thus,
53% is an important figure, indicating that friendship played a role,
if not in the decision to adopt, at
least in attitudinal support following transracial adoption (8•. : . 86).
Other studies support Falk's findings on the
charact:eris tics of TRA couples.
Ethel Roskies ~ speaking
at the Michigan Department of Social Services Conference
on Hard-to-Place Children, reported on the findings of
a study she conducted in Montreal.
It involved 168
transracially adopting families and a control group of
\<}'bite families that had
adopt,~d
children matched to
them.
She cone luded ,that the TRA coup lE~s were "superim:: 11
in that 75% of the couples were college graduates, and
all the husbands held
were welh·satisfied.
~esponsible
jobs
~!Jith
\vhich they
· Roskies found the TRf.. couples to
be emot:tonq.lly emancipated from their
families~
and able
to nw.ke and carry out a decision different from their
parents.
Their attitude appeared
t~o
be that they "didn't
give a damn \vhether their parents approved or disap-
proved 11 of their decision to adopt across racial linc;.s
(25, p. 26).
Ethel Branham of the Los Angeles County Departrr.ent
of Adoptions reported on the 28 families who ht.-l.d adopted
34 black and part-black children through the agency
between 1956 and 1964.
She, too, found that these
couples exhibited a high level of intelligence.
Sixteen
of the fathers were college graduates, including five who
held doctorates and three who held master's degrees.
Nine others had from one to three years of college, and
only three had not completed high school.
Among the
wives, one held a master's degree and six others were
college graduates.
Eleven of the women had from one to
three years of college) and only
high school.
t\ivO
had not completed
The occupations of the husbands included
college professors, teachers, .businessmen and supervisors, entertainers, and a writer.
Eleven of the
families were Jewish, six were Catholic, three were
27
Protestant, and eight
wer~
either Unitarian or non-
denominational.
In summary, one can say that transracially adopting
couples are most likely to be well-educated and professionally employed,
They usually have either a
natural or adoptive child in their home at the time of
their interracial adoption.
·They are concerned vdth
social problems, and tend' to be active in the community.
Transracially adopting couples share the characteristics
of self-confidence and self-awareness, and are inde-
pendent thinkers who have "no need constantly to rely
on family or community approval for their activities 11
( ')3
4-......'
'
p. 6).
Marmor believes the most distinguishing characteristi.e of people who adopt interraci.ally is their freedom
from ethnocentrism.
He defines ethnocentrism as
the tendency of a person to think in
relatively rigid ingroup-outgroup
terms~ with superior values being
attributed to the ingroup and inferior ones to the outgroups
(23, p. 6).
Ethnocent~ic
persons are apt to be prejudiced against
mlnori.ti.es, and thus are not likely to become adoptive
parents of non-.'tvhi.te children.
Non-ethnocentric individuals tend to evaluate
people on their own merits, rather than on their group
identification.
Non-ethnocentric people are more
idealistic, non-conforming, and flexible in their attitudes.
l'-1armor finds that they are more sensitive and
empathic in their interpersonal rela-cions.
Non-
ethnocentric pQople are those best able to adopt trans-
racially, for they are emotionally independent and
mature, and have a high capacity for frustration tol-
erance.
Just at the time when adoption Bgencies v1ere able to
identify the characteristics of the people most likely
to adopt interracially) and when the campaigns to seek
them out \,Jere beginning to succeed, the number of transracial adoptions declined dramatically.
The sharpest
decline came in the number of black children adopted by
'tvhi t:e families.
There Y.Jere only 1, 5 69 such adoptions
in 1972, a decrease of 39% from the previous year.
This
was due primarily to the "militant campaign by some
black social workers (vJhieh) obviously discouraged certa:Ln agencies from approving white adoptive appl:lcants,
however qualified" (29).
The position of the National
Association of Black Social Workers, the most vocal of
the groups opposing transracial adoptions, is that
" 'black ehildren should be placed only
~vith
black
families - whether in foster care or for adoption' "
(26, p. 36).
Many agencies thus reverted to their
previous practices of denying adoption to black and
other non-white children if non-vJhite families were not
avail.:tble.
The National Association of Black Social Workers
further contends that "black children are exposed to
certain loss of their pride and identity to satisfy the
selfishness of whites'', and thus transracial adoptions
are
11
genocida1 11 (26, p. 36).
:by Thaddeus
Hathis~
This position is amplified
a member of the Philadelphia
Alliance of Black Social Workers.
He states that re-
search clearly indicates that racism, with its emphasis
on ;;vhite nationalism, is m1 integral aspect of American
society.
Therefore, vibite parents who are themselves
products of what Mathis tenns the
white imperialist society are
surely not appropriate role models
for black children, nor can they
possibly prepare the black child for
his role in the liberation struggle
of his people (24).
.
tLs,
1n t-_urn, w1• 11
Th
<
It
. .
., s t ress 1n
.
crea t e t remen. d ous 1ncernaL
terms of the child's being able to survive outside of his
family environs, in a hostile world" (24).
These views are echoed by Maye Grant 9 black
therapist~
counselor, and instructor.
Her opposition is
based on the fact that race is a
pervasive, predominant, and
prevailing issue in this country,
and on an assurance that most white
people cannot prepare black
children ... to meet this issue
( 14' p. 6 7).
30
Grant believes that it is·only because of the shortage
of white infants available for adoption that this "';vbite
'fad' of exemplifying liberalism developed" (14, p. 73).
According to Grant, there are a number of
11
tests 11
which both the children and the adoptive parents will
have to face.
For the children, there will be the test
of "living among and amid people who had to unteach
themselves the lessons of (their child's) inferiority"
(14, p. 74).
These children will miss the opportunity
of mingling with, and being nourished by, people who
look like them and have had simi.lar experiences.
Host
important of all, there will be the
test of being raised by persons who
could not teach (them) where or when
to expect the knives of racial injustices to appear or to cut.
(There
is) no place (for a child) to withdraw
except within onesilf (14, p. 74).
For the parents, Grant states that there will be
the test of having to explain family membership to
strangers, in front of the child.
They will have to
watch, and react to, their natural children being
confronted or snubbed.
Furthermore, parents will have
to deal with housing and employment restrictions.
Finally
~
'
there \vill be the test of
11
not having ex-
perience in understanding covert and overt racial
slightsn (1.4, p. 74).
The racial polarizatioa in our society is also cited
by Edmond Jones, Assistant Director of Family and
3i
Children r s Se:r:vices for the Baltimo;.:·e City Department of
Social Services, as an
irr~ortant
factor in his opposi-
tion to transracial adoptions .
... being black in the United States
is a special state of 'being. I
question the ability of 1:-vhite parents no matter how deeply imbued with good
will - to erasp the totalitv of the
problem of~being black in this society.
I question their ability to create what
I believe is crucial in these youngsters - a black identity (18, p. 157).
Jones discusses what he sees as the major concerns
involved.
First of all, there is concern for the
child's identity as he approaches maturity and begins
to
qut.~stion
"not on.ly \vho he is and from :tvhence he came,
•.. not only his race and color, but his ancestral and
cult:ural background 1 ' as ·well (18, p. 159).
Secondly,
there ls the problem of the social culture in vJhich the
child will find himself.
relatives?
Will he be accepted by
\.J'ill hi.s family's economic mobility be
threatened by his presence?
IHiJe<:t d"~J.• ong
Jones fears that the
1
,ct~asn
into transracial
placements -
~·1hile
in
some instances perhaps meeting the needs of a particular
child - is basically a s-.vitch to focusing on the needs
of adoptive parents" (18, p. 159).
He is concerned that
the child is no longer the central party in the adoptive
placement.
Finally, Jones declares that
I don't believe the average white
parent has done such an excellent
or satisfying job in th~ rearing of
his own tvhi.te youngsters, and I
32
hesitate to expect that something marvelous will happen as
we transfer their ineptitude to
rearing black children as well
(18, p. 160).
Hhile opposing any further transracial
c:~doptions,
Jones also recognizes the need to help parents who have
already adopted black children tO foster within these
children the ability to come to grips with themselves as
black persons.
First of all, the parents must be able
to deal with their own feelings, and examine themselves
as
11
members of a vvhite racist society.'
They must be
able to accept themselves "as being an alternate or
. second choice for this child'' (18, p. 162).
Secondly,
the parents must seek out black persons and institutions
in order to gain at least some insight into the black
experience.
Finally, transracially adopting couples
must recognize that their "decision will cause severe
reaction in today's emotionally charged situation"
(1.8, p. 162).
Leon Chestang, Assistant
Professor~
School of
Social Service Administration, University of Chicago,
sees a dilemma in the fact that there are thousands of
black children needing homes, and a significant number
of "VJhite families ready to provide them.
He feels the
question is whether interracial adoption of these
children runs
counter to their welfare, frustrates
their personality developn~nt, and
confuses their identities. Can white
families assure black ch:Lldren an
environment in which there is optimal
opportunity for growth development,
and identification (5, p. 100-101)?
Chestang contends that only black families can give black
children these assurances, and bases his conqlusion on
what he sees as the negative social attitudes toward
blacks which prevail in this society.
According to
Chestang~
the black man is bicultural,
and lives both in the larger society and in the black
'"·oc·-i,r..,.,,...
r.:>t-n
(j
...
~;;
~
Thts duality results in the
development of two parallel and
opposing thought structures - each
based on values, norms, and beliefs,
and supported by attitudes, feelings,
and behaviors - that imply feelings
of depreciation on the one hand and a
push for transcendence on the other.
Effective social functioning and
environmental reality require that
black persons incorporate both these
trends into their personalities the one to assure competence in dealing with reality, the other as an
impetus for transcending reality
(5, p. 102).
Black children raised in white families will not
develop
biculturally~
Chestang
identity will be diluted.
claims~
for their black
These children will lose
contact with the black experience, and hence will be
unable to cope with the exigencies o1 black life in
·our society.
"Having been socialized largely to the
white experience, such a child is likely to experience
an identity crisis all his life; thus he will be truly
fr·~·o-mpnr'""'d"
(:;l.{.J.._
\'7.lov-'
(5 ) p _.
\.-
"'10~)
~.
J
/
,;)
Like Jones, Chestang feels that adoptive parents
need to be made aware of what is involved in a transracial adoption.
They must realize that
the negative societal traits
attributed to blacks are likely
to be inherited by the adoptive
family, thereby subjecting the
~arrtl'lv t') ~ncults
ra~~a-1
~lu·r·c
w
:, ,
......
and ostracism (5 9 p. 104).
d..,
-
,}
•
..L
~
..L.
-.l _,__,
' ~ •.l '
the~
larger community
"t1'hich no longer considers them to be a
"white family,"
They must be prepared to deal with
but rather,
11
ruiners of the community 11 (5, p. 105).
It is obvious that there is no shortage of opinions
as to the consequences of transracial
adoption~
Black
social workers contend that the children involved 'tvi11
grov;r up unable to cope w·ith either the vJh:i.te or black
societies~
for they will lack black identities.
Dr.
Leighton Hutson, speaking at the First International
Conference on Hixed Rac:e Adoptions, took exception to
this pessimistic prediction.
He sees identity as the
image a person has of himself, and as the product of
people's feelings about him, particularly those of his
parents.
If one accepts this definition of identity,
then
the development nnd adjustment of
black children reared in white
families will depend on the degree
of trust, security, and self-esteem
derived from the pattern of intercommunications in the family. The
emotional links with· significant
35
· families members \-.Till be more im-
portant to developing identity than
the physical fact of light or dark
skin color (20, p. 62).
Hagen, speaking at the same conference, declared
that people must be viewed as individuals, which
means that their race and bf.ologi.cal
background are seen as fActors which
make up their unique individuality ...
Hhen race is not seen in t:2rms of
identity but ofily as a factor in identity, we can more appropriately talk
about a person's race (27, p. 27).
It is to be anticipated that transracially adopted
ehildren may confr·ont crises concerning their identities.
Such crises will most probably occur during adolescence.
Hmvever, because of the fact that the surge in the number of transracial adoptions did not come until the late
1960's, few of the children involved have reached this
stage.
Thus, it is not possible to yet know the full
impact of transracial adoption on the children.
The
studies d:Lscussed bel.mv represent early attempts to
assess the overall development and adjustment of these
cihildren, and the attitudes and experiences of the
adopting families.
l:.§:.::!2:ence
~:
Falk, using the same groups of TRA
and IRA couples previously discussed, attempted to learn
the extent of TRA adoptive parents' awareness of their
children's identity.
He asked tht:m 'l:vhether their
36
children, whose average age was 5 at the time of study,
ever wondered why they look different from their parents.
Slightly less than 19% indicated that their children had
inder2d asked.
"The number that have asked is suffieient-
ly large to indicate that parents will be needing to deal
'~d.th
this aspect of the child's identity 11
{0.
'
..... )
D
.a.
._
'"•Q\I
L
•
Temporarily adequate responses which the parents stated
they had given their children included:
sons differently;'
'p~rsons
11
1
God ma.de per-
have different colored skin
as they have different colored eyes' "
(9~
p. 20).
Eventually, these parents will have to provide more
complete answers for their
children~
for our society
does not equate different colored skin with different
colored eyes.
Another area which l"alk explored was \.vhether parents
of both in-racially and transracially adopted children
ever tried to imagine how their children felt about
being adopted.
parent~
Seventeen percent more of the TRl\.
indicated they had indeed thought about how
their children felt.
Eighty-three percent of the IRA
parents indicated that they speculated about the
biolog.Lcal parents of their children, as compared to
71% of the TRA parents.
Thus it would appear tbat
11
TRA
parents are less interested in the genetic parents and
more interested in the children's feelings about being
adopted" (9, p. 21}.
37
An important aspect of
·~--·
1 t1es
.
d 1rr1cu
Falkt~
study concerned the
. .
d ana:'1 exper1encea
•
'
b y lootn
' 1n.
ant1c1pate.
racially and transracially adopting couples.
As pre-
viou~sly
32/~
mentioned,
70~~
of the TRA couples and
of the
lRl\ couples bad a child in their home prior to the
adoption being studied.
Yet virtually the same s1nall
percentage of each group indicated that there had been
any difficulty in getting their other children to accept
this adopted child.
Thirty··five percent of the TRA parents antic:Lpated
that their children might encounter difficulties, such
as heckling and teasing, when they were in school.
Of
the 52 TRA couples with school-age children, 42% of
them
reportE~d
such problems.
Again, 35% of these
parents anticipated dating difficulties, "such as
rejection by potential dates and harassment by parents
of dates'' (8, p. 87).
As to occupational possibilities,
the majority of TRA couples felt their children would
encounter fe\\' problems if they were able to complete
college.
The area of parental satisfaction with their
adoptions vms also explored.
Since most of the IRA
couples were having their first parental experiences,
they indicated that the ensuing parent-child relationship was the most satisfying aspect of the adoption.
For the TRA couples, the satisfaction lay in
11
the area
38
of human :relations, such .as in. learning that persons
accepted their adopted child, and in seeing persons 1
racial attitudes change: 1 (8, p. 87).
Another means of determining satisfaction \·Jith their
adoptions)
~;.vas
to ascertain if couples in hotb groups had
discussed with friends and relatives the possibility of
adopting the same type of child they had adopted.
Among
the TRA parents, 71.5% indicated that they had had such
discussions; 82.5% of. the IRA parents had held such
discussions.
Thirty-seven percent of the IRA couples,
and 21% of the TRA couples stated that they had influenced someone to adopt as they had.
Falk felt it was
significant that fully one-fifth of the TR..4. couples had
friends or relatives who adopted transracially as a
result of their influence.
For both 'l'RA and IRA couples wi.th natural children,
93% felt that "son" and "daughter" held the same meaning
for their adopted, as well as genetic, children.
However, when asked if they could feel as loving to an
adopt:ed child as to a genetic child, a slightly smaller
percentage of TRA parents answered positively.
TRA
parents were also slightly less affirmative than IRA
parents when asked if they \.vould adopt the same way
again.
Thus Falk concluded that there was "somevJhat
less satisfaction with transracial adoptions'' (8, p. 88).
Falk fears that the
11
social reformer" motivation
39
of some TRA couples rnay lead to eve.n.tual identity difficulties for the child.
If the child is used as a
"show-piece" and is "overexposed to the larger community
as a kind of foil for creating racial awareness in an
othervJise all-white commun.:Lty :• then he will likely exp. 23).
These
difficulties may include over-acceptance by the community, or host:ili.ty and aggression tovmrd hin.
If~
on
the other hand, the child is
kept isolated from normal social
intercourse, or from contact with
.
.
ot h er memb ers o:r:,.. h.J_S m1.nor:tty
group,
,
h
1.,
'11
.
tnen e ~Kely w1
exper1ence
identit:y problems latt~r in l:i.fe when
it is n~c~ssary for him to interact
\'lith the larger comrm:mity (9, p. 23).
Moreover, the fact that 53% of the TRA families have
friends \vho
havt-~
also adopted interracially suggests
that "TRA parents are providing themselves with an ingroup community of mutual support" (9, p. 23).
w1dle
this may provide psychological reinforcement for the
parents, it might also prevent the children from having
broader encounters with both the Caucasian and minority
communities.
Falk, therefore, sees potential identity problems
arising from a child's very limited exposure to his
minority community or overexposure to the Caucasian
community, "reference group confusion '\vhile s i.multaneously selecting an occupation and a mate, and the
being downwardly mobile in a racially
hostile :setting" (9, p. 25).
However, he feels that the
superior socio-economic leve 1 of the 'I'Rl-1. parents, permitting good educational opportunities for the adopted
child, can mitigate some of the potenttal problems.
Fu.t:thermore; . an awareness of the child's identity and
an understanding of \.:rhen related p:cob lems are likely to
occur, a balanced exposure for the child to both the
'
'
.
'
.
'
oroaaer
commuruty
ana' }n.s
own minon_ty
sub cu 1... ture, ana,
a realistic awareness of racial attitudes within the
residential community ;;vill hopefully help to pre\1ent
emotional problems.
I .. os Angeles County Department of Adoptions conducted a
follow-up study of the 28 families who had adopted 34
black and part-black children between 1956 and 1964, in
an attempt to learn hov;r the families were functioning.
Thirteen families were eliminated from the
study~
either because less than a year had elapsed since the
adoption bad been completed, or because the family chose
riot to participate.
One couple, who agreed to be
studied, was eliminated because they resided in the
South, and the Department of Adoptions did not wish to
draw local attention to the child, who was Caucasian in
appearance.
The remaining 15 couples, ~. . .ho had adopted
1
l. o0 cru.
·11
c ren, were interviewed in a semi-structured
manner by Ryo Suzuki and Marilyn Horn, both of the I... A.
County Department of Adoptions.
No interviews were held
with t:he children, and no attempt was made to obtain
assessments from persons other than the parents.
The educational,
occupational~
and religious back-
groun.d of these couples was included in the ear·lier
discussion of Branham's findings.
Su::~ui-cL and Horn
learned that nine of the 15 families studied bad
initially indicated that they could accept a child of
any racial mixture.
However, two of these couples
ultimately excluded a part-Oriental child from consideration.
Three of the couples specifically re-
quested a part-·black child.
One family requested to
adopt a child V-Jho tvas already in their home as a foster
child.
At placement, ten of the children had been under
six months of age, with the remaining eight ranging
from s:i..x to twenty-four months of age.
At that time,
nine of the mixed children were described as Caucasian
in appearance.
At the time of the study, five children.
were from three to four years, nine children were from
five to eight years, and four children were from eight
to ten years of age.
One of the nine Caucasian-
appearing .:.:hi.ldren looked visibly b lcJ.dz at the ti.me
of the study.
All the other children appeared as
described at placement.
Eleven of the thirteen
school-age children attended public schools and the other
two attended private schools.
Perhaps the most important 8Tea explo:eed vms that
of family adjustment.
Suzuki and Horn found that the
majority of families vJc->.re functioning
enjoying raising their children.
wel~,
and were
They cited as evidence
s~tisfactio~
to support their finding of overall parental
the fact that seven of the twelve families who subsequently adopted another child chose one ':vho v.1as non-
1
.lvhite.
The eight families with Caucasian··appearing children
stated that they had encountered no problems arising
from their children 1 s background.
"HovJever, four of
these families speculated that if their children bad
• l b ave h a d prob.Lems
. .,
II
1._ooze
1 d Negro, t h ey rrn.gJt
(
34., p. 5) .
Three of the eight families did not share these feelings,
for ea.ch had adopted another child of visibly mixed
racial background, and had not subsequently encountered
problems.
Five of the seven families with visibly black
children stated that they felt very comfortable about
their children, and were not defensive about their
racial backgrounds.
had experienced
Five of the school-age children
i3ol~ted
incidents of taunting at
school, but "each family seemed comfortable in handling
the incident with their child.
Several of the parents
felt that imagined problems never materialized, and that
most of their fears were unfounded" (31.,, p. 6) .
Two of the families with visibly black children
found the stress great, and each felt that their
child~s
problems were accentuated by the visible dif-
ferences.
The initial adjustment appeared to have been
d if. f::Lcult, and the parents
11
expres sed concern that their
children seemed confused about their 'identity' and
vJhere they belongedrr (34, p. 6).
Family A felt that·
thei:r son was anxious, fearful, and tense from the time
of his placement at age eight months.
He tvas alvJays
acutely aware of his racial background and appearance.
He ha.d academic and social adjustment problems, and
~vas
attending private school at the time of the study.
The
parents had obtained psychotherapy for their own
problems, and also sought help from a child guidance
clinic.
At the time of this study, the boy was
beginning to make progress.
Family B also felt great stress and also sought
psychotherapy.
An older natural daughter had rejected
the boy, as had the maternal grandmother.
In addition,
the child was having academic and social difficulties
at school.
The parents indicated that, perhaps, it was
not the racial difference that was ultimately causing
the stress, but rather, their own personal problems.
44
11
They stated frankly that in retrospect,· it \-?ould have
been better if they had not adopted any chilcl 11 (34,
p. 6).
For all the children, the fact of adoption had been
well established in early childhood.
The families were
able to ans-;,,er their children 1 s questions honestly and
openly.
Suzuki and Horn concur with Falk 1 s finding that
transracially adopting parents are more interested in,
and aware of, their children's feelings about adoption.
The parents, characterized by the researchers as being
perceptive and sympathetic, r.tJere aware that the question
of why the natural mother relinquished her child for
adoption is one which all adoptive parents must face
with their children.
They understood that it was a
difficult question to answer, and
hoped that when their child reached
adolescence, be would be better
able to comprehend the situation
and the circumstances which made it
impossible :Eor some natural mothers
to keep their babies (34, p. 8).
Suzuki and Horn found that
11
the area in which the
families seemed uncertain is when and how to share information about their children's ethnic origins" (34,
Five of the families with visibly black
children, and two with Caucasian-appearing children,
stated that they will definitely tell their children
about their background.
Six families, the majority
of whom had Caucasian.-appearing children, indicated that
they did not know tq what extent they
~;,muld
share infor-
mation about their children's racial background with
them.
F1.mil:Les who were told by the agency that their
children were one quarter or one eighth black seemed
particularly unsure of what to tell them.
Two families
with Caucasian-appearing children,
who each understand that the natural
father's background was thought to
be Negro, but that it was not definitely known, felt that there was
no reason to share this information
with their child ... One of these
parents felt true background information would be damaging to his
') /. p •
c h 1.. ld ( ..)"''"'
0 )
0,- •
OURS) an organiza-
tion composed of families who have adopted Korean or
Korean-American children, conducted a study in the early
1970's of 33 families who had adopted a total of
l~6
ch:tldren from Korea.
OURS endeavored to determine what
prob 1E~ms the families
~-;rere
confronting, and to vJhat
extr.mt the families v-.rere helping their children to
identify wi.th their Korean heritage.
T\venty·-nine of thQ 33 families reported that their
children had encountered no discrimination or prejudice.
Six of the families reported that their children were
actually given extra attention and made to feel special
by others.
The four families who indicated that there
had been prbblems felt that they were of a minor nature)
and there were no problems they felt unable to handle.
Three boys were occasionally teased at school,, and one
seventeen year old girl was bothered by the fact that
she had no dates.
The parents were "sure the children
could weather the teasing vlithout any ill effects
because none of them felt insecure or inferior"
(21~
p. 160).
Ttventy-one families felt very strongly that their
children should be made aware of their Korean heritage
and be proud of it.
Sixteen of these families a.re
consciously teaching their children about their Korean
background through the use of books, learning the
Korean language, and having Korean friends.
Only three
families were opposed to teaching their children about
their Korean heritage.
Two families felt their
children would be upset because they now "consider
themselves only American and prefer not to remember
their background" (21, p. 165).
One parent felt such
teaching would set up a conflict in his Korean children,
who have nm.v assumed American values and standards.
The remaining nine families had no plans to teach their
children about their Korean background because they
questioned their children 1 s need for such information.
However, they indicated that they would answer any
questions which their children raised.
OURS also inten1iewed sixteen children, eleven of
whom were over ten years of age.
They found that eight
of the children were proud of their Korean heritage and
talked freely about it.
They expressed an interest in
learning more about it.
Six of the children have very
bitter mt::mo:d.es of Korea, and tvere upset by any mention
of it.
They have become very Americanized and have
strongly rejected everything Korean.
The remaining t\vO
children expressed no.particular interest in their
Korean heritage.
Hi Taik Kim and Elaine Reid:
Kim and Reid, of the
Unj_v,o;rs:i..ty of Hinnesota, studied 64 fam:Llies vJith 17
full. K.orean and 55 Korean-American children.
The
children ranged in age from ten months to fourteen
years at the time of placerr.ent, v.Jith 67% being under 5
years of age.
The children had been in their adoptive
homes at least ten months at the time of the study.
The characteristics of these adoptive parents were
similar to those previously cited in the studies of
Falk and others.
The motivation for the adoption was
primar:Lly humanitarian in nature.
Eighty-three percent
of the families had at least one biological child in
the family at the time of the adoption.
Seventy~,six
percent of the couples had received a college education,
and 68% were engaged in professional or managerial
occupations.
/ Q
·+u
The focus of Kim and Reid's study was on the process of initial adjustment of Korean children to a
culturally changed situation, and their adjustment
status at the time of this study.
During the initial
adjustment period, 73% of the children shov.1ed at least
one physical.symptom, such as overeating and fatigue.
Emotional reactions such as frustration, fear, and
crying were exhibited by 96% of the children.
Ninety
percent of the children manifested behavioral disturbances such as fear of separation from parents,
sleeplessness, excessive demands, and hyperactivity.
Finally, 89% encountered problems because of such
cultural differences as language, sleeping pattern,
and food.
The most difficult period of adjustment was the
first two months.
According to the parents, 82% of the
children were emotionally and physically well-adjusted
by the end of six months.
Only 17% of the parents
considered their children's problems to have been
serious.
There was a tendency for parents whose
children were between two and five years of age to
consider the problems more serious than did other
families.
At the time of Kim and Reidts study, 96% of the
children were adjusting well to their adoptive homes.
The children were developing good language skills,
enjoying good physical health, showing a good emotional
relationship to their parents, and getting along well
with their siblings.
Only 17% of the children were
having any peer problems, and only 14% were below
average in their school
~JOrk.
While 91% of the parents
expressed great satisfaction with their adoption, 9%
expressed little or none.
"There is a tendency that
the better adjusted the child is, the more satisfaction
the ctdoptive parents .feel vJith their adoption, and visa
versa' 1 (21, p. 1+00).
The authors found that 68% of the parents expressed concern about their children's future identity
development 5
marriag(~
racial discrimination.
prospects, and experiences with
Eighty-six percent of the
parents expressed interest in Korean culture and
history, and planned to make their children aware of
their Korean heritage.
Kim and Reid concluded that intercountry,
transracial adoptions are workable .
. The children's basic needs for love,
security, and stimulation can be
met through this kind of adoption
without any serious traumatic
experience". Adoptive families can
have the same rich and meaningful
experience and satisfactions
through this interracial or intercultural adoption as is possible
with intraracial or intracountry
adoption. (21, p. 310).
In a
different type of study, Sandra Scarr-Salapatek,
Professor in the Institute of Child Development at the
University of Minnesota, and Richard Weinberg, Director
of the School Psychology Training·Program at the
University of
Hinnesota~
looked at 101 families to
determine \vhat happens to the IQ scores of black
ehild:cen
\Aiben they are
adopted by white families.
Sca.rr-Salapatek and Heinberg noted that previous studies
have sho'Vvn that
11
b lack children in this country, as a
. group, score lower on IQ tests than vJhite children do.
The difference between the two groups is about 15
points ... 11
(32, p. 80).
By studying black children
reared in \-vhite homes, the researchers hoped to learn
~.;rhether
the IQ difference between black and white
children is attributable to genetic or environmental
factors.
One hundred and one families in the Minneapolis
area Here dravm. from the membership of the Minnesota
Open Door Society and from the files of the Adoption
Unit of the Minnesota State Department of Public
Welfare.
Once again, these families displayed the
characteristics found in other studies of transracially
adopting families.
Host parents were college graduates
and the fathers were employed in professional fields.
A total of 321 children tvere included in the study.
51
One hundred forty-five children were biological and
176 t<Jere adopted.
One hundred thirty of the adoptees
were black, with 22% of them having two black natural
parents, 52% having one black and one white natural
p~rent,
and 26% having one black natural parent and one
natural parent of Oriental or unknov,rn a.ncestry.
~>6
remaining
The
adoptees were of white, Oriental, or
Indian anc.estry.
Each member in the family over the
age of four was given an IQ test:
Stanford-Binet fo~
children 4-8 years old, WISC for children 8-16 years
old, and
~JAIS
for children over 16 and all parents.
The psychometrists wbo scored the tests were unavJare
of the children's race or adoptive status.
Typically, the adopted children, regardless of
race, scored above the national average on the IQ tests.
The white adopted children attained an average score of
111,
~vhile
average.
the black adopted children scored 106 on the
Oriental and Indian children scored at the
na.t:Lonal average of 100.
Scarr-Salapatek and Weinberg
found that age at the time of adoption and the child's
experiences prior to adoption were strongly related to
later IQ.
11
The earlier a child was placed, the fe\,Jer
disruptions in his life, and the better his care in the
first few years, the higher his later IQ score was
likely to be" (32, p. 81). ·Thus the ,white children,
who were adopted earlier than any other group, scored
52
the bighes t.
The Oriental and Indian children, who v;;ere
adopted later than the other groups of children and who
had lived longer in
institutions~
scored the lowest.
The
99 black children adopted at an early age scored an
average of 110, while the nine vJhite children adopted
at an early age scored an average of 117.
The researchers inferred that if the black adopted
children had been raised by their natural parents, their
IQ scores might have averaged about 90.
They reached
this conclusion by looking at the educational level and
occupations of their biological parents.
Nevertheless,
the black adopted children scored above the national
average for both black and white children, and scored
especially well f.tJhen adopted at an early age.
· 11 In fact,
the lowest score of an et:trly-adopted black child, 86,
was close to the average for all black children in the
nation" (.32, p. 81).
Furthermore, the black children
did better in school than would normally be expected.
On both aptitude and achievement tesf.:s they scored above
the average for Minnesota schoolchildren and above the
national average as well.
They scored in the 55th
percentile in reading and math, while the average
ranking for black children in the Minneapolis area is
the 15th percentile.
Scarr-Salapatek and V.Ieinberg concluded that
environmental change can bring.a.bout a significant:
53
increase in the IQ scores of black childreri.
In addi-
tion, such·factors as age at time of placement and the
characteristics of the adoptive family contribute to the
increase in IQ score.
Scarr-Salapatek and Weinberg
summarized their findings by stat:Lng that "children
whose natural parents bad
relati~ely
little education
and presumably below-average IQs can do extremely '{vell :Lf
they grm.v up in an enriched en vi ronment 11 (32, p. 82).
Chi.JA
l:Jelfa~. Leag~!::_
of A..rnerica:
The most com-
prehensive study of transracially adopted children to
date was conducted by Lucille Grow and Deborah Shapiro
of the Child He lfare League of America ( C\iJLA).
It
~;\~as
funded by a grant from the Office of Child Development,
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
The
subjects were 125 black children who were at least six
years old, and who had been in their white adoptive
homes for at least three years.
The sample was dre:nvn
from the files of social agencies in Boston, Chicago,
Detroit, Los Angeles, Minneapolis-St. Paul,
Montreal~
and Seattle.
The success of these transracial adoptions was
assessed by a series of fifteen measures including
personality tests, indices developed from different
types of data supplied by the parents, teachers'
evaluations, and ratings by CWlA interviewers.
Parents
were interviewed at the time they were selected fer
participation in the study and again one year later to
assess the stability of the information obtained earlier.
The scores from these measures \vere combined to give a ·
single~ composite score indicative of overall
11
suc..:cessn.
The characteristics of these adoptive parents were,
once again) similar to those of other transracially
adopting parents.
The majority had biological children
at the time t:hey adopted the child being studied, and
one third had already adopted one or more other children.
At the time of the second interview, one third had
adopted other black children.
Host of the
paren~t[)
were college graduates, and the husbands were profes-
sionally enployed.
The majority of the families lived
in totally or predominantly white ccmmunities o£ 50,000
or less.
The parents cited social and humanitarian reasons
for their decision to adopt transracially.
Almost
hal.f expressed initial concern over the reactions of
their relatives, although most disapproving relatives
changed their attitudes follmving the adoption.
Host
parents indicated they would have adopted a child of
any racial background.
an
11
However, two-thirds expressed
intellectua1" preference, with half of these parents
r.equesting a cbild with above-average intelligence.
The rnaj ority of. the children were in the appropriate
school grade for their ages.
They were taught by pre--
dominantly white teachers, and were the only black
children in their respective classes.
According to both
parents and teachers, the childrerr were doing average or
above-average work.
They were reported to be getting
along well with other children and as having close
fd.end!;.
Gr:otv and Shapiro de term:Lned that the sample group of
125 children had a "success" rate of 77% as assessed by
their set of fifteen
mc~asures.
This rate is ~.pproxim~_tely the same
as that of otner stud1es that have
exam:lned conventional l;·Jhite :Lnfant
adoptions, as well as those concerned
with the adoption of older children
and other racial groups (15, p. 224).
Grow and Shapiro found only two statistically
significant relationships between the summary score and
variables describing the families and children.
Childred perceived by their parents
as obviously black were more likely
to have higher summary scores than
those whose blackness was perceived
as not obvious. Children in the
largest family units (5 or more
children) were also likely to have
higher scores than those in smaller
units (15, p. 225).
Grow and Shapiro found that 78% of the mothers and
82% of the fathers had few or no problems in acknowledging the racial background of their child.
This was
especially true for parents of obviously black children,
56
and may account for their children's higher summary
scores.
Thus, less
~qell
"matched" children are seen as
doing better than the lighter children whom the agencies
attempted to match with the adoptive parents, and for
tt?hom the denial of racial differences is easier.
This in turn may mean that parents who
acknowledge openly the child's difference may also have the ego strength
to deal competently with the problems
of child rearing in general. Conversely, parents who deny the c:hildts
difference may also tend to use this
defense mechanism more generally and
with negative consequences (15, p. 236).
Ninety-three percent of the families reported that
the:Lr ch:LLcl:ren 1vere aware of their racial background and
had clisr.:.:ussed it
~:vitb
them.
T~vo
fandlies sa:Ld they
would tell their children about their backgrounds in due
time, o;vhile four had not yet decided
would tell their children.
~vhether
or not they
Two families said they will
never reveal that information to their children because
they are Caucasian in appearance and their black ancestry
is one quarter or less.
Most of the parents felt it was important for their
children to have pride in their heritage.
Eighty per-
cent of the families reported having black friends, and
felt t:his
'~·las
an important me:ans of instilling racial
pride :Ln their children.
Host families maintained con-
tact with other familieG who had.a.dopted transracially,
57
OURS,
SG
that their children \vould have friends \'lith
s imi.lar home_ lives.
Furthermore, families provided books
and materials about and by blacks for their children to
use.
Grow and Shapiro found that
the stronger the parents' orientation tO\.vard race, as measured by a
coniliination of activities and attitudes) the greater the likelihood
of a positive attitude on the part
of the child toward his heritage
(15' p. 230) .
Only 24% of the children were said to have attitudes
v.ri th negative connotations, such as confusion, embar--·
rassment, or
anger~
toward their backgrounds.
A dis-
proportionately large percentage of the children with
negative attitudes were fair-skinned or light brown.
Approximately half the parents reported that their
child had been subjected to some form of cruelty.
Most
frequently mentioned ·v-1ere incidents of name-calling or
1 1'
l.1ec«.
:tng, with occasional physical abuse.
Such ex-
periences were reported more frequently for the darkestskinned children, and for girls.
Despite such problems,
97% of thi children were reported to get along well with
their peers.
Seventy-eight percent of the study children
get along well with their siblings all or most of the
ti.me.
Only 4"/o of the adopted children were described by
thei.r parents as being distant, antagonistic, or jealous
of their siblings.
Only 3% of the siblings were reported
58
to have·similar feelings toward the study child.
Grow
and Shapiro .concluded, therefore, that "in terms of general well-being, the large majority of the children in
this sample are doing V>7e 11 11
(
15, p. 23LJ.) •
Conclusion
The Child \velfare League of America concluded that
transracial adoptions succeed as well as all other types
of adoptions, and that the children do not seem to have
any problems the parents are unable to handle.
The Los
Angeles County Department of Adoptions concluded that
11
in general, the families felt that the problems stemming
from the ehild's racial origins were not as great as they
had anticipated' 1 (34 s p. 9).
Host of the couples ap-
peared able to handle v1hatever problems arose, and were
not anxious about their children's futures"
"In general,
the families felt that the problems they had were, by and
large, typical of any parent-child relationship'' (34,
p. 9).
Marmor concurred v1hen he stated that "the prob-
le.ms '.Jhich have been anticipated ... have almost always
turned out. Lo be considerably greater than those which
have actually materialized'' (23, p. 10).
The partici-
pants at the First International Conference on Mixed
Race Adoptions concluded that "there was a high expecta.tion of problems in interracial adoptions, but that this
had not been the general experience of adopting parents
so far" (27, p. 62).
59
Studies conducted to da.te do not appear to support
the contention of the National Association of Black
Social Workers that the black child, or any other nonwhite child, faces greater problems or loses his identity
when raised in a white family.
~tite
Hm.vever, the problem
parents face is that of developing a positive
self~·i.rnage
and identity in their
non-~;vbite
child when
it: is assumed by many that th.i.s cannot be accomplished.
This may lead to uncertainty and anxiety ori the pa:r·t of
the parents.
Hagen fears that
in their attempts to help their child
develop an identity which is different
from theirs, they may lack the spontaneous and natural relationship that
can exist between child and par~nt
(27, p. 23).
Hutson feels the cxucial factor in producing a
~,,ell-adjusted
child is the extent the family is alloo;;ved
to manage its inter-family relationships.
He noted,
hmve\rer, that there are "forces such as.. . the need for
ethnic solidarity among black people which may exert a
disruptive influence on this family process" (27, p. 63).
The claim made that the transracially adopted child
will experience discrimination in the larger Caucasian
community denies the fact that discrimination is not new,
and can be found anywhere.
There exists the distinct
possibility that "children with permanent parents, even
though of another race, might better be able to absorb
'"
60
tb!:! effects of discrimination than children -;vithout them 11
(3, p. 95).
Chestang, while outspoken in his opposition
adoption~
to transracial
nevertheless feels that
not every black child who is raised
in a ... ~bite home is necessarily
go ina ~n h~vo a_-ny rr·n-o p~rsonnlitv
J
problems than anyone else. True,
~\-LJ..b
L,....._
.,,:.;:_
\;::
!.,..A..•.....
.-.
::_,,~.~
C'...
~-
-,:~r~ rc
~
·1,... cu.
l--. j__"i._ct
:1
r•1
.r..L.
--;~-. -4
].'f· .l'ot.
a 1-\1
,_,...._a.c
"'-~Ltl
\v.u.~..e
par~nts you're going to_ run up
aga~nst some stresses that otner
people don't face. But I think thatrs
...
·"'
·'
J-
,
not as bad as being in an institution
( £'16 , 1). 1.".")
+L.
0
Clearly, further studies of this new trend in adoption are neceDsary.
Areas needing particular attention
include the development of the child's identity, problems
Of.
n~~nlPRce•1~e
-'·, . _ ~. - - •. <..-
sel(;;ct::Lons.
'
~r~al
a.
L
£•1·-~-11~'1
_ .1.1 a.
.
:!
mate and occupatiorial
Hmvever, in the ultimate evaluation of the
tra..nsracially adopted child's development, the
basis for comparison should not be
some ideal norm, but rather, what
their fates and personalities would
have been if they had been allowed
to grow up, unadapted, in a series
of generally less-than-satisfactory
foster homes (23, p. 10).
This 1;-Jrit.er concurs with Harmor 1 s judgment
that such a comparison will demonstrate that these children, in the
total balance, will have benefited
immeasurably by the kind of love,
support, and understanding that
these white parents will have given
them (23, p. 10).
CHAPTER III
DESIGN OF THE STUDY
This is a descriptive study· of the .adjt::stment of
transracially adopted children.
An analysis of family
drawings has been made using a checklist designed for
this study and based primarily on the work of Joseph
DiLeo and Elizabeth Koppitz.
The checklist incorporates
the characteristics which DiLeo and Koppitz identify as
;...,..1
•. 1.-,:~
a'--
"ke·,,..,
)
f;<CtL-·l~'='n
<... ,~
"' - Cl
to be considered in analyzing
ch:t.ldr.en 1 s }.:'and.ly drawings.
dr::mings.
DiLeo and Koppitz did not,
The checklist developed for this study
of t:he adjustment of transrac:Lally adc1pted children was
refined following a pilot study conducted in the Spring
o.f 1975.
There is no data available on test-retest
cbecl.::lis t.
J3asf::.t.i on. an evaluation of family dra'.:vings,
adopted chi ldxen to de tc:r.mine if the:y
~ts
:lt1t.egJ:D.l
rn~rn0ers
of tbeir
vie~t;
this
thcmse lves
An
~nalysis
draw:Lngs has c.lso been made.) in
these children accept their
siDLtngs as integral members of
62
·These same dravdngs have been. used
to assess the overall emotional health of
t~ansracially
drawings have been used
adopted children.
to asaess self and sibling awareness of distinguishing
racial characteristics such as hair texture and skin
coJor.
The family questionnaire has been designed to
th2 child and his
t:ddit:Lonal
An as sessrr.ent h 9.S been mads o£ the chi.ld::~en. 1 s
fmnLty"
and
th<~ Lc
offe~ed.
pro~
fami U . es
~
and. whcu:: parental exp lanati.ons were
The questionnaire also focuses on problems
t:.c.:rn.r;rncially adopted c.: hi Jd:r.·en have encountered in the
the children and
their parents have responded.
Finally, the question-
nalre seeks to determine the extent to which parents
<J:ce
h~;1pin.g
their transracially adopted children
:identify w:Lth, and learn about, their minority heritage.
Sampling Procedure
....
.... _...,_,.....~··--'""•"""""O.'''""~·
.,.~-
,-~-·~~~
This stu.dy did not employ random sampling procedures.
To have done so would have gone far beyond the exploratory
nat~re
of this study.
Further~ore,
the resources
r:·equLeed to investigate a random sample of trans racially
adopted children and their families would be considerably
t:he present study.
The
()3
majority of families in this study were selected from
among the members of the Open Door Society of Los
Angeles.
The Open Door Society is composed of families
;;..;rho have adopted trans racially.
Other fam:Llies included
in the study were personai acquaintances, and recommenda··
tions made by various perBons.
To be inclu.ded in this study, each fa,Tiily bad to
have at least one transracially adopted child and one
otJH:::L
ch:Lld, either adopted or biological.
The families
were se lee ted \vho had transracially adopted children
old enough to complete a family drmving.
Families \J£:'!re init:Lally contacted by telephone to
obtain consent for part:Lcipatlon in the study.
Wl:erever
postdble, a personal visit to the f.?l.mily was made.
The
purpose of the research was carefully explained and all
participating farnil.:Les vJere assured of complete
anonymity.
The children
V7et·e
asked to dra\v a picture
No further directions were given.
'1\velve by eighteen inch Hhite paper and crayons were
provided.
using
However, some children felt more comfortable
othE.~r
paper or l.,mrking \.<lith other media, such as
pencils or marking pens.
l
•
DDlng
1
•
t~e1r
Si~lings
were separated while
•
•
.
draw1ngs
to avol.d any copylng.
vTnile the
parents were interviewed, using the questionnaire dis~vhere
cttssed in a previous section of this chapter.
long di.s tances prevented a home interview, drav;ring
materials, the questionnaire, and instructions were
mailed to the families.
DHta~Gathe:cinq
Instruments
~~--·-~-----~---·.Q, ----~-~~~---
Checklist.
The rationale for using fmuily dravrings
to measure a child 1 s adjustment, acceptance within the
c111d en1otj_onaJ.: healtl1 i.s found primarj_l.j"' in tl~1e
studies of Joseph DiLeo, a child psychiatrist, and
Elizabeth Koppitz 7 a clinical psychologist.
Both DiLeo
Rnd Koppi tz conduct:0.:d empirical inves tigat:Lons of the
draHings of normal
a~·td
emotionally disturbed children.
On the basis of their analyses of the drmvings, they
we:ce able to identify characteristics associated
the drawings of normal children.
~vith
In like manner, they
were able to identify characteristics associated with
the drawings of emotionally disturbed children.
Although DiLeo and Koppitz worke.d independently, both
have concluded that a child's family
dra~ving
an emotional response to family members.
drawing
11
represents
A family
expresses feelings and attitudes to\vards
individual members of the family and the child's own
status \-lith in the group" (7, p. 96).
that a family drmd.ng
11
Koppitz found
rcveals a child's attitude toward
his family and is not a faithful reproduction of the
G5
child 1 s aetual famil}'.n (20? p.
The checklist
~.,as
L:V~-).
developed as a means of determin-
ing the presence or absence of features considered to be
important in evaluating children 1 s family dravJings (see
Fi.gure 1).
The most significant aspect of a child 1 s
drar,.::Lng is 't·Yhether o:r not he includes himself.
~vho
omit themselves
11
Children
do not consider thernselves an im-
portant or integral part of the family.
Such an omiseion
is never deliberate; it reflects the child's unconscious
p. 135).
A well-adjusted, emotionally healthy child is pleased
with himself and ;;.vould automatically include himself in
h:Ls drawing.
The omission of pa:r:ents and/ or siblings from a
family dr<lv\ling is also of greB.t importance.
These
ex~
, .
. ·~·
CLUSlons
are a 1ways. s1gn1-1cant
an d , Kopp:Ltz states,
rnust
never be considered unimportant or accidental.
DiLeo states that: siblings may be omitted because of
feelings of jealousy "as a result of parental comparison
vith a more admired .:.:;ibling" (7 ~ p. 194).
tends to omit his rivals.
A child thus
Koppitz concludes that the
noT.:lssion of family members from a family portrait
reflects strong negative attitudes on the part of the
child tmvard the omitted family member" (20, p. 139).
Koppitz states that a child has no difficulty
dra~;ving
the family rnembers he likes.
It is therefore
66
FIGURE 1
CHECK LIST FOR EVALUATING
CHILDREN 1 S FAMil.Y DR.AHINGS
Family:
Name:
Age: --·-
Adopted or Biological:
Age
Sex
Siblings~
Sex:
Racial Background:
Adopted or
Biological
Racial Background
l.
2.
3.
L~ •
..)
1.
.
Does the subject include himself in
his drawing?
-::;-:·"'"l)()e-stT:leSU'5]'Ei'"Cf.l.r1CTud8b-6 tl1par-e n t s
i.n hi.s drm·Jing?
If no, 'ivho is missing?
J8C. 1l1C Ucie~aTISibii
·:~~-~--,.,-j;::r-~-~-~1-·
,~-~-;-_,..b_,...-~t----~
~.
Uu~J
~·~aU
ngs-
....---~---
----
in h:Ls drE,wing?
If no, who is missing?
~~Wer"e
I
order of age?
If no, who was out of order?
T:w:::tTy members Cfr awn in relative proportion to eac h other?
If no, who was not in proportion?
)~:····---f,fe're
--t
-----~
---
una. l e to comprete
the figtu:e of any fnmi ly member?
If yes, \vho \•Jas not co mpleted?
.,.---.c'~·•·r:~:;-~:~~-;;-:.L-•--;
D.
t
f'an1:Ciy- members pl.aced in c·orrect
~u~
~ne
'"
SUuJ~C~
J. n c·-t·-1':-...,-:-::-::--3ve
a· ifficulty in
Ilo:.
drawing a particular f amily member?
·L-·E
VL'C
"·'llr)?
" .
.J
\,;. • .._; '
\ll ........
~"~"--~u···:.J"'7t
• -:.=-~s·,
1h
I "'
.......
1-..l.L"-~
"- ~--·
,_.
--
·-
~---~~~
--·--
67
-·--=E-,
Yes
8.
Does the
ments in
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
subject use embellishhis drawings?
hair color
hair texture
eve color
sltin shading
freckles
gl~sses
-~-··-·-·---·-
----E
·--~~-=--
otheJ.:':
-g-;--~\iJas~~-h'1ytiur:g-~U:n~~u.t:-+the drawing?
----~f .:e s , ~vha t ~--------,.
No
.
_L .
----·~- ·~---·
i
-·
__j
--
____j_
68
when a child has.difficulty completing the
figuTn of a particular family member.
"Whenever this
it is a good indication that the child is hostile
occurs~
tO\,.r.n:d that p.::n:ticu lar parent or sib ling" (20, p. 139).
Furthe::.:·;:rror.e, tbe inability to improve the figure of a
•
'I
.•
• 1
'
d esp1te
•
•
•
•
partlCULar
tam1
y memoer
excess1ve
eras1ng
lS
11
imJ£;:riably a sign of intense anxiety and reveals
hGstility toward the person who is being drawn" (20,
p. 14
. ()'\
.. J
.,
The child· Hbo sees himself as an integral part of
his family unit ·will usually draw the family members in
approxim.:~.tely
the correct age order and in approximately
the correct proportion to each other.
However,
most children with emotional problems
are arr~ivalent toward their parents
and siblings, having both strong
positive and negative feelings. This
ambivalence is often shovm by a change
in the size and position of family
mem.bers (20, p. ll!-1.) .
Koppitz concludes that the "child bas to resort to omissions, substitutions or the changing of size and position
of the figures as ways of revealing his underlying negat:ive attitu.des tovJard family members" (20, p. 134).
In addition to analyzing the drawings for the
presence or absence of the features considered significant by DiLeo and Koppitz, a section was included on the
checklist: concerning the child's use of embellishments.
This was to.
determinr~
the child's mvareness of dis-
tinguishing physical characteristics between various
fa.m:Lly members.
A final question concerning unusual
features of the drawing was included in order to cover·
any additional factors which might be relevant to
an.s.lyzing a particular child's family portrait.
Questionnaire.
--
---·~~----
A questionnaire was constructed to
p:r:ovide additional information about the transracially
adopted child and his-family (see Figure 2).
It focuses
on the child's awareness of his racial background, his
school and neighborhood experiences, and parental reactions to any problems which
havE~
arisen.
Finally, it
seeks to determine the extent to \vhich parents are
helping their transracially adopted child to identify
with, and learn about, his minority background.
FIGURE 2
FAl"liLY QUESTIONNAIRE
Children:
Sex
Age
Adopted or
Biological
Racial
Back.ground
1.
2
.., •
.:>.
L1-.
r
::>.
6.
1.
Does your child know he is adopted?
2.
Has your child noticed that he looks different from
the other family members'?
3.
How do you know?
4.
lias your child asked why he looks different?
5.
Hhat was your answer or explanation?
6.
Has your child encountered any problems in the
neighborhood because of his racial background?
PleaSE! explain.
7.
Has your child encountered any problems in school
because of his racial background? Please explain.
8.
How did your child handle the situation?
9.
llow did you respond and react?
10.
How have your other children accepted this child?
11.
Are you helping your child to identify with his
minority backg;round? Please explain.
CHAPTER IV
__ ____
.........,.._
ANALYSIS
OF THE DATA
._
~-
T~l~. l:::?r~<?-J:ion
Ktghteen [Bmilies
ticipBt:e in this study.
the drawings and
of 777.,.
~vere
contacted and asked to par-
Fourteen families completed
que&tionnaire~
for a participation rate
These 14 families have a total of 52 children,
30 of hrhorn are transracia1ly adopted (see Figure 3).
Forty-two of the. 52 children drew family portraits,
with the remaining 10 being either too young to complete a drawing or too old to want to participate.
The ll2 ehildren who completed drawings included
2L~
transracially adopted children and 18 siblings.
Tabl.e l summarizes the racial backgrounds of the
2~.
tran.sracially adopted children who completed family
dJ~a:~~ri_rlgs
C·
'rl1e 18 s:Lblings
~vl1o
completed fa1nily
.
. 11 y adopted siblings.
:tour 1.n-rac1.a
~·
The transracially adopted children ranged in age from
4 1/2 years old to 13 years old~ while their siblings
ranged in age from 3 3/4 yaars old to 14 years old.
The study population included 12 transracially adopted
lTI. tJ.
.,
1E~ Fi ana 12 transracially adopted females .
The group
of 18 siblings included 1.0 males and 8 females.
.
Tl
~.
FIGURE 3
SUM.I-'.ARY I'NrOPJ>lATION ON FAMILIES AND CHILDREN
PARTICIPATING
F I.~~.JJ___ ~ Sex
M
A
M
M
l1
B
c
F
F
!-1
M
F
F
F
H
F
D
Black-Caucai;ian
Black-Caucasian-Oriental
1/2
Adopted
Bicloc;ical
Black-Cc:ucaaian
Caucar.ian
no
Cauc<:tsi.?.n
Caucasi..an
yes
yes
Caucasi.an
7
5 l/2
Bfolor;ical
Biclcglcal
Biological
Biological.
Adopted
Caucasian
yes
yes
Black-Caucasian
yes
i.3
Adopted
Indian
yes.
yeu
yes
6
1
14
13
12
yes
H
Adopted
Indian
Black-Caucasian
Black-Caucasian
ye.s
M
H
9 1/2
8
Caucasian
yes
E'
F
5
4
Biological
Biological
Adopted
Adopted
10
9
Adopted
Adopted
H
F
H
M
F
M
1''
--
F'
H
I?
}'
.,
1/2
7
3 3/4
Cauca5ian
ye~:;
Bl:H:k-Caucasian
Black-Oriental
yer;
Indian
Oriental
Hl<tck·-Caucas:Lan
Bl.:>ck-Ca•!cas ian
yes
yes
yes
no
yes
Gcuca~ian
yes
Caucasian
OrientaJ.
Black-Caucasian
Black
no
no
yes
yes
6
4
3
2
9
7
4 1/2
Biological
Adopted
Biological
Adopted
Biological
Biological
Adopted
Caucasian
Black-Caucas:i.an
Caucasian
nlack-O::iental
Caucasian
Caucanian
Black-Caucasian-Indian
yes
7
€
6
B:!.ological
Adopted
Adopted
E:LoJ.ogical
Adopted
Adopted
Cauca10ian
Black-CatJ<.:as :i.an
Black-Ori.:>ntJl
Caucasian.
Black-·Oriental
Black··Ct,ucao: i.>.n
yes
yes
yes
14
Biolog:!.cal
Adopted
Caucus :f. an
Black-Caucar>ian
yes
yes
7
Adopted
Adopted
Biologtcal
Black-Caucasian
Black-Caucasian
Caucasian
yes
yes
Caucasf.an
Caucasian
Caucasian
Black
yes
yes
yes
yes
Caucasian
yes
Black-Caltc&s i~gn
yc~s
H
3
3
K
H
H
6
J,
H
M
ye:1
Biologic<:l
Adopted
Adopted
Adopted
18
!,'
rc
Adopted
Adopted
Biolog·.ical
yes
17
13
9
1<'.
F
F
N
no
Adopted
Adopted
H
!1
yes
9
7
6
.F
J
Adopted
Adopted
5
2
Cauca£i,Jn
l!
X
Dr..:wi!}Ji
Me,~icao···Caucn:3 tan
ti
-~--·-------
Bacbj£.'?.':1..~-
/.i.dopted
F
H
F.mnily
Racial
Adopted
M
G
Adopted or
Biological
12
10
F
F
__....f:_~--
IN THE STUDY
...
]_I"!
s
F
l
M
1?
11
8 1/2
M
F
7
4 l/2
Adopted
Adopted
Adopted
Adopted
M
H
9
5
Biologi.cal
Adopted
---------------
----
yes
no
on
yes
JCS
yes
yes
no
no
no
-. '!
i .:_,
T.ABLE 1
RA.CIAL BACKGROUNTIS OF TRANSRACIALLY ADOPTED CHILDREN
V-.1HO COHPLETED F AHILY PORTRA.ITS
Racial
Pe'rcent
·~·___~-J?.ac_tf.,_Ec;~I]E____ ~- Nuro.;,.b.~--~~.
B lack~·Caucas ian
Black-Caucasian-Indian
2
8
15
63
1
1
4
Indian
3
13
Mexican-Caucasian
1
4
Orie.n.tal
1
4
----·~---~-,-·v-
TOTAL
100
Forty- two family portraits -v;ere completed, 2lJ. from
transracially adopted children and 18 from their siblings.
However, two of the 4 1/2 year old transracially adopted
children did not complete meaningful drawings, leaving
2 .~-_,·~_-.'
,.
.
__f or artct .·-YS
:t_S
,.
The most significant aspect of any child's family
portrait is whether ox- not he included himself.
All /+0
children included themselves in their picture, indicat-
ing that all the children view themselves as integral
members of their family.
Furthermore, no tr2nsraci.ally
adopted children were omitted from a sibling's picture,
thereby suggesting that all transracially adopted child1:en
<:Li::'e
perceived as accepted members of
thE-~
£ami ly unit.
Four transracially adopted boys had omissions in
The 9 year old boy in Family G
tbE.dx family dra\vings.
omitted his father.
omit~ed
The 10 year old boy in Family D
both his father and mother, as did the 6 year
old boy in that family.
() .,:_,_·,_i.t~P~
- · . ~~-·
h~s
....
-1?
-~
~,rP~r
-0-
old
This same 6 year old boy also
s~ster
....
'
the on 1·'-Jv
.
.
Caucas~an
.
·'-
"}ll..
'--~
Jd
•
1
Before seeing his drawing, the mother
of this child indicated,
however~
that he has tremendous
perc£:ptual problems and therefore dis likes drawing.
When
she sa:"" his ptcture, she expressed surprise at how many
fam:lly members he
~;-vas
able to include.
Finally, the
10 year old boy in Family F omitted his 3 3/4 year old
75
sister, the only biological child in the family.
A
summary of the inclusions and omissions bv• the transracially adopted children is shor..m in Table 2.
A sum-
mary of the inclusions and omissions by their siblings
can be found in Table 3.
All transracia11y adopted children \vere able to
complete the figures of all family members drawn.
They
did not appear to have any difficulty in drawing a
particular family member, as evidenced by the fact that
there \,Jas no excessive erasing in any family portrait.
All but three transracially adopted children placed
their family members in approximately the correct order
of .age.
The 9 year old boy in Fa.miiy G placed his
mother in the middle of the children.
The 5 year old
boy in Family N had no order to the placement of his
family members.
bou~se,
The mother -vvas drc:n·m to the left of a
and the other raembers to the right.
placed b:Lmself above h:Ls father and brother.
The boy
The 10
year old boy in Family F also had no order to the
placament of family members.
cars, and no
t\·JO
They were placed in two
members were drawn next to each other.
Four of the transracially adopted children did not
dr&t;.v their family members i.n relative proportion to each
other.
The 5 1/2 year old girl in Family C drew her
father considerably smaller than any of the other
family membe:r:s, including herself,
The 5 year old boy
76
TABLE 2
INCLUSION OF FIU:.:ULY MEMBERS IN
PORTRAITS BY TRANSPJ1.CIALLY .ADOPTED CHILDREN
M
F
Percent of
I~1e_l}~ Y-'_Jll£..~9.£~L-~_.JB.= g)___
. __ili::J.Q.L_~--~-~Jc:~ l .·-
12
10
100
Father
9
10
86
l1other
10
10
91
Siblings
10
10
91
Self
TABLE 3
INCLUSION OF FAl>'III.Y 1'1ENBERS IN
PORTRAITS BY SIBLINGS
M
.{~=
F
lQ.)_ _ (N= 8)
Percent of
Total
Self
10
8
100
Father
10
7
9!+
10
..,,
94
10
8
100
Trans racially
Adopted
Siblings
77
J.n Family N, the 9 year old boy in Family G) and the 10
yc~ar
old boy in Family F made all members the same size.
The only transracially adopted child who was not drawn
in r1roportion to the other family members was the 5 year
old boy in Family N.
His 9 year old brother made all
members the same size.
An analysis of the embellishments used in the
draw·~
ings determined the children's awareness of the distinguishing physical ciharacteristics of the family
members.
Nineteen of the·22 transracially adopted
children used at least one embellishment in their
Twelve of their 18 siblings used
at least one embellishment i.n their family portraits.
Table 4 summarizes the type of embellishment and the
frequency of its use by transracially adopted children.
Table 5 summarizes the type of embellishment and the
frequency of its use by their siblings.
Three of the drawings by transracially adopted
children had unusual features.
The 5 1/2 year old girl
in Family C not only drew her father out of proportion
to other family members, but also omitted a number of
features on him that she included on other family
members.
He had no arms, mouth, feet or clothes.
As previously mentioned, the 10 year old boy in Family F
dre\.Y the members of his family in two cars.
The father
was in a race car, while the other members, excluding
78
TABLE 4.
OF EHBELLISHHEN'TS BY THANSRACIALLY ADOPTED CHILDREN
Hair Color
6
9
·68
10
9
86
Eye Color
1
5
27
Skin Shc9,ding
"
L.
1
14
Freckles
0
2
9
Glasses
1
6,
23
Hair
'I\~xture
TABLE 5
USE OF ENBELLISHHENTS BY SIBLINGS
Hair Color
1
5
33
Hair Texture
6
6
67
Eye Color
0
2
11
Skin Shading
2
1
17
Freckles
0
2
11
Glasses
2
2
22
79
the 3 3/4 year old biological child ~vho vjas omitted,
ov;ere in a camper.
This child \:vas the only one tvho did
not: draw hi.s family as a unit.
The 9 year old boy in
Family G spent a considerable amount of time drawing an
elaborate tree and birds.
He also drew Mary Poppins and
He dr<::vJ his family members, excluding
Slf•ep:Lng 13e::mty.
the fa·::ber who was omi.tted, last of all and had to be
::·errd..nded
fl.~equent l.y
what the task vms.
______
Ana1 ";'sis ...........
of
Questionnaires
- ........Family
..... ,......
.,.._._,_,,
-·-
..,.,,,_.,..
,__
.,~,..-~~-~~-·~
--.:..
..............:.,...
This section presents each of the items contained
·::1
t-.]. 1<;;..
1.{
.- •.•
' '_ 1
,_ d.IT
.1.. ...
j
Questionnaire .
Following each item are
the responses which were obtained.
responses indicated that every transracially
child knows he is adopted.
Has vour child noticed that he looks different
---·~~~--.......=<=J ........ ~---~~---~-----~-
every transrecially adopted child has noticed that he
looks cU.ffcrent frorr. the other family members.
3.
kr~o~·1
Ho::_v__ do
,..Yo~.~?
All parents stated that they
their children are aware of the different
appearances of family members because their children
The children mention having
brown or black skin while other family members have
tan or 'ivhite skin.
Furthennore, the children,
3()
pHrticu:Larly the black and half-black ones, comment
about the texture of their hair compared to that of
other family mE:mber.s.
The mother of the 6 year old boy
in Family B stated that he always picked out pictures
of black people in books and magazines and said that
they look like him.
F:Lve of the
asl·u:::d
~;~by
2L~
t:cansracially adopted children have not
they look di.fferen.t from other family members.
Two of these children are 4 years old and two are 5
'T'h
-F • f-t h c h 1......
1 c1
~ e .~1
years o 1.._d .
Family G.
•
1s
th.e
The parents in Families
07
D~
.
year o ld. b oy u1
F> and J stated
that the question has never specifically been raised
since the phys:Lcal differences among family members has
B.hvays been a part of the family conv-ersation.
The
children have always known that each member looks
different.
It should be noted that these three
families have the greatest number of transrac:Lally
adopted children:
Family J
5.
b<:':tS
Family D has 5, Family F has 4, and
4.
}:~_!-~as
.J:£.U!:._ ans~:v_~E ?r exp lan~tio1~?
Nine of
the families have given a biological explanation of their
transracially adopted children to account for the fact
that they differed physically from other family members.
A typical answer was that of the mother in Family I,
who told her daughter tl111t
11
people are born the color
0~
r) -l.
of their original mother and fatber 11 •
FarrrLly F told her children that "they
The mother in
~vere
born to
someone who looked like them, and they are a combination of their parents".
The two 4 year old childn'!n
Hho had not asked why they look different have, nev·..;:~r~11e ].. es s, b een t ·o ld auout
t.
·
L
9
y~?:ar
t 1~.-~e1r
._
b 1.0
• Log1.ca
.,
·
1.. parents.
The
old boy iL'. Fa·mily G has also been told, but his
motbe:t: said he "hc:lSn' t conceptualized the idea of
;(being) adopted.
He refers to the time when he was
in
:his adoptive m_other 1 s belly".
Three of the remaining 5 families have given their
children explanations that do not specifically refer to
the biological parer;.ts.
The parents in Family C told
their 5 year old daughter that
.f .
A.r1.ca.
hc~r
ancestors came from
The parents in Family J told all 6 of their
children about the "evolutionary advantages of (a)
particular coloration for different geographic loca-
tioru:;n.
The parents in Family N anm·Jered their 5 year
old son's questions by telling him that
each person's soul chooses ~·7h3.t
they are to be. He was to be half
black and half Caucasian and chose
us for his parents. The only way
this could be was for him to be
born from someone else and for us to
adopt him.
'l'he parents in Families A and E, whose 5 year old
children have not asked why they look different, have
not offered any explanations.
82
6 • .~~hi]-0_
.~j..._glD22~!jloo:!._beca_ll~
encountered~rC?_.~ms~h£.
his raeial
b~&.rou!l£'?
l'~ive
of
the families indicated that their children have encountered some problems.
The parents in Families A, C,
K, and N stated that their half-black children have been
called !!nigger" by other children in . tbe ·neighborhood.
The children in Families C and D have encountered some
name-calling at the park, and the parents in F'amil.ies A
J>ttnd D ht:P.re rec~ived stares and comments in stores.
Famil:Les C and K hmre had some problems Hi th
hostile adults in the neighborhood.
The neighbors of
Family C condoned the:tr children's name-calling and
physical harassment of Family C's transracially adcpted
child.
However, once they got to know the child in
Family C better, there were no more problems.
Both
neighbors of Family K tvere hostile initially, and one
family still is.
7.
Has your _£llid
!l~hg~~l--~t:!:~-'::~_S::f.
encount~. al"!.Y_J2E2..~~~.:!:E!.
hf..s _!2.s;_ia_1 baclsg_~nd?
Six of the
families indicated that their transracially adopted
children had encountered some problems in school.
The
children in Families D and K have occasionally been
teased or called names.
The children in Family F have
also been called names at school.
fam:lly lives in a black
However, since the
neighborhood~
the children
attended a black school for several years.
The 7 1/2
year
.., ct" . B 1acK-Caucas1an
' ...,
.
01
. 1 . was ca-.ea
' 11 '
g1r
11
h.on<y
1 II
'!... • l~
W11~
c
the 9 year old Oriental girl vJas called nchine.se-eyes". ·
Although the family still lives in the same black
nej_ghborhood, the children are nov,7 driven to a vJhite
school by their mother.
.. ,, c~ .. i"'"I
n ,...J;;'·~
..l~..._..~l·:.cl
7
(_"""'
11
n1' goer"
'"'-b•
...
'q
The 7 1/2 year old girl is
The 9 year old girl is very
popular and not called names at ber nevJ school.
The
10 year old Indian boy has learning problemss which
.the mother believes have been aggravated by the change
in schools.
He identifies more closely with blacks and
enjoys speaking "ghetto Eng1ish 11 •
Although no one
taunts him at his present school, his mother says he has
had more difficulty adjusting to, and working
in~
thE-~
white school than the black school.
T~vo
families reported problems resulting from
teache:r- bias.
The 7 year old boy in Family L was
"in (a) bad sit:u.ation - teacher very biased".
The
family subsequen.tly changed their child to another
school, x-vhich the parents
ft.~e
l bas a better attitude.
The 9 year old boy in Family G had attended an
Alternative School for several years.
In the Fall of
1974, he transferred to the neighborhood school.
mother reported that he
~~ad
The
a teacher who was
convinced he wasn't bright, because of his race.
assumed he couldn't learn math".
(She)
The mother reported
that the teacher was surprised when the parents were
able t•J he 1-p him catch up."
Unlike the other five families, it was not the
transracially adopted child who encountered a problem
in school in Family N.
Rather, it was the 9 year old
biological son who was teased.
"One child) ·seeing Alex
and his brother said, 'It mu.st: be awful to have a
for
nl
. 'gcrr>- ~.?t.:>- ;_
\,..
8~
1
1::1"'"0"'hPr
t... ~
J...
II
Families C, H, and J reported that, rather than
.
~ncounter~ng
, 1 ems; t.elr
h .
l . "'d ren were S1ng_e
'
-, d out
proD
Cl1L
The parents in Family C stated that their 5 1/2 year old
daughter's peers tended to be curious about her background, rather than rude.
Her classmates have asked
her why she is brown and her parents are white.
The
mother in Family H reported that her 4 year old
daughter appeared to be invited out more often than
1:"1er peers.
The mother feels her daughter is the "token"
mi.nority at parties.
The 6 year old boy in Family J also
appears to be singled out for special attention.
mother stated that
11
The
people who obviously want the
people around them to know they are not prejudiced overindulge him (by) obviously singling him out 11 •
8.
Jim~ dJ:d lO;!r ch:Ll<i__l_wnd~- t~ situ~tiog.s?
Pa.rents indicated that their children have been able to
handle whatever problems or incidents have arisen.
Both
the transracially adopted children and their siblings
respond to name calling
themselves~
us:Lng epithets
For instance, the 7 1/2 year old girl in Family F \.vill
ea 11 children "bonki' when she is called Hnigger".
The
9 year old boy in F'a.rnily }J' \•Jho was teased about having
H(.l
nigger for a brother 11 got mad a.nd ifCalled them
etc.
'!.;n
J ~ -- r·r
--- -
~
•J'
Llc
u
t rn.0.."dn
.1:
(He) did not appear to be
In addition to name calling, .the 6
year old boy in Family K will f:Lght back, hitting and
kicking those who tease him.
The only child who appears to have bad difficulty
in handling his school problems, according to his
mother, is the 9 year old boy in Famlly G.
His mother
stated that he was miserable in school and couldn't
cope with his teacher's bias.
school.
He didn't want to go tc
He '\vas "depressed because he was doing badly, 11
and had poor peer relations.
The mother stated that,
at the time of this interview, the situation at school
had improved,
9.
Ho~v_ d~LYE~.-~_e.§J?.O~d__3!.~d ~£e~.?
Parents
indicated that thej were often angry when their children
livere ea.lled names or teased, but that they tended to
stay out of the situation awl let their children handle
it themselves.
Usually the parents talk
~vith
their
children and try to help them understand why other
people engage in such activities.
The response of the
mother in Farni ly A is typical. . She "explained calmly
that people do it out of ignorance or (because they
have no self-confidence.
(It is) a vJa.y to make them-
The mother in Family N told her sons
that
"thE'~
best thing to do was simply say 'name calling
If (her sons) call names
back, (they) are lovver1.ng tbemse lves to that leve 1n.
In
the case of the 9 year old boy in Family G7 tutoring in
math helped correct part of the problem.
However, the
tnothe:r stated that she still had to "yell (at him) to
get hi.m to go -to school' 1 .•
.
Finally 1 the mother in
Family J stated that she has occasionally removed her
children from situations which· she and her husband. felt
were beyond the children's ability to handle.
10.
child?
All families reported that their transracially
adopted children were well accepted by their siblings.
They indicated that, of course, they have problems but
that they are the same ones that arise between any
. , 1.
s:t.b .:tng;s.
No parent felt that race
rnade
any difference
in sibling relationships.
Eleven of the
14 families stated that they are actively helping their
transracially adopted children to identify with, and
learn about, their minority backgrounds.
E, G, Hn.d L are not.
Only Families
The parents in the 11 families
!17
U1
';.Jho are vmrking with their children mentioned that they
have minority friends as well as friends Hho have also
adopted transracially.
In this way their children have
opportunities to interact with both minority adults and
children, and to develop an integrated view' of life.
P.~rents
mentioned providing books and magazines
about, and by, people of various backgrounds so that
children can be c ome----aeq-1:1-a--ia-EE:4--w-i-t1-1-l:h~1.-Ch:Ley_e~~-------
t hr:; i r
ments of minorities. ·Parents also have purchased toys,
such as dolls, \vbich reflect various racial backgrounds.
Furthermore, parents indicated that they take their
children to museums where they can learn about the
history of their own minority.
Even the mother in
Family E, who stated that she is not, and vJill not s do
much to acquaint her two transracially adopted children
with black history, does have minority magazines in the
house nnd makes a point of showing her daughters that
tbey
11
a.re n.ot the only black people in the world".
Families indicated that they are most concerned
with having their children learn the meaning of brotherhood.
Parents a.ppear to emphasize the importance of be-
ing good human beings vJho are happy with themselves.
The rnot.her i.n Family J surnmarized the feelings of most
of the parents \.vhen she stated that
we are anxious that all our children
have a deep and abiding commitm.ent to
their membership in the human race and
a complete understanding of
individual differences; that by
understanding and valuing their
own unique place in this worlds
they will be able to •.. relate
to other individuals as individuals,
undefinable by any categorization.
CHAPTER V
SUHNARY Arm CONCLUSIONS
Transracial adoptions have taken place in the United
States for the last twenty years.
However, it·wasn't
until the supply of Caucasian children available for
adoption declined. dramatica'lly
and the number of non-
J
,.,;hi.te children avJa:Ltin.g r1doptive placement ir1cre<:;.sed
markedly) that adoption agencies began to actively
recruit white families for these non-white children.
1~is
surge in transracial $doptions occurred in the
late l960 1 s and early 1970's.
In 1972 the National
Association of Black Social lflorkers :Lssued a demmcia-
tion of the practice of transracial adoption and, as a
result, the number of such placements declined
rapidly.
Today, adoption agencies make verv few
transracial placements.
The primary objection of the National Association
of Black Social Workers to transracial adoption was that
non~\vb:Lte
children \vould grovJ up with the feeling that
they anj not part of their adoptive family, and that they
~·;rou1d
not be accepted by their siblings.
Furthermore,
they' r;muld enc:ount<.:;r numerous problems, both in the
ncighbcn:hood and at school, with
89
~.vhich
their Caucasian
Lm.able to deal.
tra0sr~cially
Finally} Caucasian
adopted children identify with, and learn
about, their minority heritage.
Th"i.B explorator"y study was design.ed to determine
the r::xt:,:mt to tvlt:Lcl1 their siblings perceive of them as
accomplished through an.
evalu2cion of the children's drawings of their families.
Paren~2l
response to a questionnaire provided knowledge
a·~, cJ ~.1 t:
their racial background, the types of problems they have
encountered nr0 how they have been handled, and the
e:>~:t:Hn.t
to •:-.Jl-d.ch the families are helping tbeir children
identify \rLth th2ir minor:U:y background.
ant.ic:ipBt~~d
ot:.tcomes of: tbis study.
These assumptions
.axe nov :-.z;.sttJJed, E.clong \«Jitb a discussion of the
l.
Tr:Anf;rc:ciaLly adopted children s2e themselves
... ..,~~~<'·-~""'"'"'"''-'<>......-·-""""'_,.,..~--.--'<<~'""'-..,......,...,.------·~---.-....... ~--~-"""",.,._-==----=·-..-
children compleced drmvings
.,"'hi.ch
..
'
tnm.se
C:0 1J.ld
]~
..
.t
.
J..n
be an.alyzed.
'
.
hLS
Since every chi.lcl inc 1 uded
portrait, it may be possible to infer
tl;rlt e.:1c:h child sees hiYnself as an integral nv2mber
of his family,
members of their families.
·~--
completed drawings.
Eighteen siblings
Every sibling included the
trans racially adopted family members in his·
dra~Jing.
This suggests that all transracially adopted children
arc:;; accepted members o.f their family unit.
is substantiated by
naire.
n~sponses
This finding
on the family question-
Parents indicated that the transracially adopted
children were well-accepted by their siblings, and that
any problems which have arisen are attributable to
normal sibling rivalri.es.
All parents felt that race
posed no problem in sibling acceptance of transracially
adopted children.
3.
Tran§.E'acialJ.y .ad::'p.te4 .. £~i].dren, __'!.t2~e
~~alt£~as
drawings.
determj.ned £l2n
emotioP:_§l~lly
analysi~their
family
Sixteen of the 22 transracially adopted
child·cen completed drawings which, based on the criteria
developed by DiLeo and Koppitz, indicate that these
children. are emotionally "healthy".
An additional four
children completed portraits with only one variant
element present.
The 6 year old and 10 year old boys
in Family D had.omissions of family
members~
It may
be recalled, however, that the 6 year 6ld boy has
tremendous perceptual problems and dislikes drawing.
This may account for some of his omi.ss:i.ons.
The 5 year
old boy in Family N did. not have the family members drawn
1n the correct age order, and the 5 1/2 year old girl
in Fa1nily C drew her father considerably smaller than
she drew any other family member.
Only two of the 22 children completed drawings
tvhicb rnigbt lead one to conclude that these children
11
healthy 11 •
Both the 9 yeai old boy
in Fa.m.ily G and the 10 year old boy in Family F had
po:;:.·trait:s which contained omissions of family members,
p la.cernent of family members out of age order, and
absence of proportion in the drawing of various family
two boys had additional, highly
unusual features to their drawings. ·
racial d:Lfferences betvJeen themselves and other members
adopted children are aware of the racial differences
· bet%'E:en them.selves and other family members,
Parents
reported that they know of their children's awareness
of distinguishing racial characteristics because all
the children talk about these differences openly.
93
Eighty-six percent of the transracially adopted children
and 67% of thair siblings used at least one embellishment in their family portraits.
Among the transracially
adopted children, 68% of them accurately indicated the
be.:Lr color of the various family members, and 86%
accurately indicated their hair texture.
Twenty-seven percent of the children indicated the
appropriate eye color, \vhile only 14% made any attempt
to indicate skin coloring.
Among their siblings, the
indication of hair color a.nd texture v.rere also the
most common embe 11 ishments.
Thirty~·
three percent in-
dicated the appropriate hair color and 67% indicated
the hair texture.
Only 11% indicated the correct eye
color, v.1hile 17% indicated skin shading.
sho~ved
Both groups
awareness of freckles and use of glasses among
thEd.r various family members .
.£l~.?-1d_r~.12_lla_y.£._~.£!£'2~~~-l:El~~r~igh b~c~~~
school are of a ''minor" nature.
Parents indicated
that the most frequent problem their children have
encountered is name calling.
The 9 year old boy in
Family G and the 10 year old boy in Family F have had
difficulties in school and this is apparently reflected
in their family portraits.
These two boys have the
most serious problems, according to their mothers, and
also the most deviant drawings.
ari.sen.
The children have
~esponded
to their most
frequent problem, that of name calling, by using
epithets themselves.
The only child who has had dif-
ficulty in handling his problems is the boy in·Farn:Lly G.
He bec<'nne depressed because he was doing poorly in
.school and his mother had to force him to go.
In addi-
tion, his mother indicated that be had poor peer relat:lorts
~
Parents indicated that they tended to stay out of
problem situations, and let their children handle these
themselves.
Parents offered support to their children
and at tempted to help them understand \vhy otber people
behaved as they did.
8.
P~-~1'.. a~~~.S:.~:.~lY._h~lL..thei_r transracia~_.1y
adQJ.?..ted __shil.d~~~- id~Sl.~~~-~~2~~~
Seventy-nine percent of the parents
indicated that they are actively assisting their
children in learning about their minority background.
Parents are using a variety of educational tools to
help their children:
books, magazines, toys and trips.
l"urt:hermore, parents mentioned having minority friends,
as well as friends who have also adopted transracially.
Parents have attempted to help. their children develop
an integrated view of life.
Conelusions
This study of the adjustment of transracially
adopted children has led to the following conclusions:
1.
The transracially adopted children see them-
selves as integral members of their fmnii.ies.
2.
The siblings of the transracially adopted
children perceive of them as integral members of their
~fCt.!fJ.i liE~S
e
3.
T~venty
of the
t\,7Gn.ty~
tv,70 trcJnsracict11y adopted
ch:Lld·.\:·en, or 91%, can be considered to be emotionally
11
healt:hy 11 in terms of the criteria set forth by DiLeo
and Kcrppitz.
4.
The transracially adopted children are aware of
the racial characteristics which distinguish them from
other family members.
5.
This awareness of differing
physic~l
character-
:tstics is reflected in the use of embellishments :Ln the
fa.mil.y portraits dravm by the trans:racially adopted
children.
Eighty-six percent of these children used
<::~nibe 11.:Lshments
in their draw·ings as compared to 67% of
t:h2ir siblings.
6,
Of the major physical characteristics which
d:i.stingu:Lsh bettv-een various family members, hair texture
a.nd h2.ir color were the ones most frequently included in
the
~ortraits
by the transracially adopted children.
97
minor problems which they have thus far encountered.
1'hesG parents are interested in fostering their
children 1 s minority identity and appear to stress
the impor:tance of being individuals who are proud of
their backgrounds.
The following quotation from
Th~ ~~~- ~ire]~
perhaps best summarizes the posi-
tion of the parents \.vho participated in this study.
v • • • if llliite parents do come to
regard their Black and Brown children
as children of special value children who enrich and deepen their
humaQ. experience in uncommon ways rather than as children \vho are
socially handicapped, then nearly
all of the conceivable problems
to be expected in raising them begin to look more manageable. In
fact, they begin to resemble the
familiar problems of children who
possess more commonly recognized
conditions of special value:
artistic talent: for example, or
superior intelligence. In other
words, they recognize their child
does not have a disability to be
denied or feared~ but unique characteristics which need special
attention and nurturance. 1
(21, p. 464).
BIBLIOGRAPHY
11
2.
Transracial
No. 1 .January,
11
1'be Quiet Revolution in Adoption".
Vol. 28 No. 9 September, 1964
5.
6.
Cbt:•stan.g, Leon.
nThe Dilemma of Biracial Adoption 11 •
.~'?~:~!·.~1).:. E?Il::.· Hay~ 1972 .
p. 100-105.
Coles, Robert. Children of Crises.
r·· .!'ll".. lJ.
(.:!
r,..., Onl·-;
,.,., :..-1:-y:~··--'CJ~ ~O''u;"" -,---- ·----n.. Jf- ....
·:· -!'" ()' T ·J
]_.;
. . ,_,
8.
~-
-...1.~
I)
.:;1
Boston.
Little,
'"
Falks Laurence,
"A Compe.rative Study of Transracial
a;:-td Inra.cial Adoptions".
Child ~ve lfare. Vol. 49
No. 2 February, 1970 p. ~.~~·- - Fallc, LDurence.
"Identity and the Transracially
l-v.1optu1 Child",
Lutheran Social \ve lfare. Vol. 9
~
No. ·-? ::>ummer,
1. 9"1::'7\----.,{'l_,.-~o:~.
p. .t.o-L:::>. - - - -
10.
Frndldn, Ht:.len.
':Adoptive Parents for Children with
Special Needs 1 ' .
Child lvelfare. Vol. 37 No. 1
Janu.::try) 1958 p .1-·b. - - - - -
11.
Fraser. C. Gerald. uBlacks Condemn Mixed Adoptions 11 •
]i~~ Yo.~l~ Tf~.~· April 10, 1972.
12.
"1-='
r' 1
~Tar
• t . ' ' Int.er r ac1a
• 1 Ad op_1on:
t'
1'h e L'ttl
r .lc~e,
h r1e
1
e
Revolution".
Social 1·JG'_E}5:·
July~ 1965
p. 92-97.
13.
!!Interracial Adoptions".
39
No. 6
Canadian
November~December
;-r·915r
99
Grant, Maye.
"Perspective on Adoption: Black into
\v'hite". ~!:; ~rld~·
November, 1972. p. 66-75.
15.
Grow, Lucille and Shapiro, Deborah. -Black
Children ,..-Hhite Parents,
Child Welfare League en:
Amen_ca.
~-----·
1-srr4. - 16,
Haggerty, Sandra.
"Transracial Adopti.ons 11 •
A~.le§,_ ~·
March 18, 1974.
1-.
.1./ •
11
Jenkins, Alrna.
Some Evaluative FB.ctors in the
Selection of Adoptive Homes for Indian Children",
~;_!_1.1J.-:;~ V!l?lfare.
VoL 40 No. 5 June, 1961 p. 16-20.
18.
Jones, Edmond.
"On Transracial Adoption of Black
Children".
Child Welfare. Vol. 51 No. 3 Harch,
19 7 2. p. 15b=I"54. -~----~-
19.
KE:lloggs Rhoda and O'Dell, Seott. T}1~ !'.1:...vch~_lg_gy gf
Children 1 s Art. New York.
Random House. T90T:--
Los
20.
Krarner, Betty, editor. The Unbroken Circle.
Iviinneapolis.
Organizationto·r-a:-unrtecC1Iesponse.
1975.
22.
Lysl.o, Arnold.
"The American Indian Adoption Pro~
ject 11 • ChJ:ld VJelfare. Vol. 5 May, 1961. p. l.j.-6.
23.
Harr;tor, Judd.
Some Ps_y_~~l~ %~~-S!S pf Trans:·
Los-~Tes.
19 .
_rac1al Adoption.
__......_=~·-
Hathis, Thaddeus.
"Black Social Worker Takes
Exception to vJhites Adopting Black Babies''.
f}1iladelpJ:-!i.§! :rribune. October 9, 1971.
25.
26.
Nichigan Department of Social Services. Frontiers
in Adontion:
Finding Homes for the 11 Hard-=tO='PTa:'Ce11 •
oct011~-r9·6 1. --~~- - - - - - - - Norris, Steven.
"The Fight for Black Babies".
September, 1973. p. 32-42.
~·
27.
28.
Open Door Society.
1970.
Nixec!_
Ra_s;,~. ~d2]2ti~J?-~·
Montreal.
Open Door Society and Children's Service Centre.
A £oyr~m~ty Pro.i£5:£·
!-fi~e~ Racial A~optionSJ
100
Nontreal
1967.
29. Opportunity. ~-q_nal Surve:z £f .Black Childre..!.l
i\dop,_!;~ in 1-97 2.
Port lat=i'd. September 18 ~ ""'1913.
30. Pettiss, Susan.
!!Effect of Adoption of Foreign
Children on U.S. Adoption Standards and Practices".·
Child Welfare. Vol. 37 No. 7 July, 19.58. p. 27-
~~·---
31. Rathbun, Constance and Kolodny, Ralph.
"A Groupwork
Approach in Cross~Cultural Adoptions".
Children.
Vol. 14 No. 3 May~June, 1967. p. 117--12-~----
32. Scarr- Salapatek, Sandra and Heinberg, Richard.
11
Black Children Grow· Up in White Homes
Toda·y.
Vol. 9 No~ 9 December~ 1975.
.....
....,._,...~,_~...,...
~
•
11
\iJhen
I'_§_y_s:l:~.OJ..£&Y
p-:-lro·=B2 •
33. S}:-dxemcm., Joan and \t.Jatson, Kenneth. "Adoption of Real
Children". ~ W~.
July, 1972. p. 29-38.
34. Suzuki, Ryo and Horn, Marilyn.
Follo~;,J-up Studv on
~l~J£s>.-t'JhLte ~dop_sLons. Los Ange1esCour1ty-Depart1nent
of Aaoptions.
JuneLl+, 1967.
35.
, . , . . 11 The vJar Orphans n.
p. 58.
Time.
March 25, 1974.