Pros And Cons Of Transracial Adoption

Transracial adoption is defined as “the joining of racially different parents and children together in adoptive families” (Silverman 1993). This type of child care takes place through multiple forms of domestically based arrangements, such as foster care, closed and open adoptions and stepchildren. The majority of transracial adoptions in this country are composed of white parents acting as the primary care-giver for racial/ethnic minority children, leading to several studies discussing the cultural differences that have taken place within the most physically visible form of adoption (Grotevant, Dunbar, Kohler & Esau 2000). The following literature highlights the compelling arguments both for and against transracial adoption, helping individuals

understand the issues that transracially adopted children may face.
This research examines the connection between transracially adopted youth and their families while injecting Herbert Blumer’s theory of symbolic interactionism. Blumer argues that individuals are simply the means of the products around them. Therefore agreeing that transracially adopted individuals, will in fact come to understand their own reality based on the family they are adopted into.
Initially, the Indian Adoption Project, occurring between 1958 and 1967, was the earliest form of deliberate domestic transracial adoption. The project was intended to create a partnership between the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Child Welfare League of America, with intentions to transfer Indian children from their homes into white mainstream culture (Fanshel 1972).
During the 1960’s the United States attempted to create similar programs in search of adoptive families for the increasing African American adolescent population, but initiatives were met with strong apprehension.

African American counsels, such as The National Association of Black Social Workers (NABSW), argued that transracial adoption was in fact a method of racial and cultural genocide, as adopted children would be forced to assimilate into their adoptive culture. This ultimately resulted in the need for both policy modification and increased education on the negative implications that transracially adopted children

face.
Today’s studies have focused mainly on the effects of Caucasian’s and African American’s feelings towards domestic transracial adoptions. With the increasing amount of minority youth being integrated into the United States foster care system, a common concern is in the best way that these minorities can be represented within their potential adoptive families (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 2001).
As previously mentioned, the National Association of Black Social Workers remains a large opponent to transracial adoptions. Among arguing a racial and cultural genocide, NABSW believes that when children are adopted across racial lines, they are unable to fully develop the self-identity and esteem necessary in order to succeed within a systemic racist society (Silverman 1993). Racial socialization has been proven to reduce adolescent stress resulting from racial discrimination. Yet, in racially diverse families, white parents struggle to nurture a concrete development of cultural identity (Leslie 2013).
Adoption advocates disagree, stating that a permanent home, regardless of differing race and ethnicity, provides an environment that acts positively within a child’s life (Swize 2002). Much like symbolic interactionism, transracial adoption supporters argue that a child’s foundation is rooted in the relationships they create through adoption, rather than biological bounds (Swize 2002), ultimately allowing the child to thrive in both their birth culture and white culture alike.
Yet, it is argued that this flexible racial line can also cause significant damage to an adoptive child.

Take for example, an African American child adopted into a white family. In this instance both white and black cultures are large players in the structure of American society, and therefore the child’s society. If one aspect of society is reinforcing the adoptees’ culture, while the other, say the appearances of mainstream black culture is undermining the adoptee, how harmonious can the identity of the child truly be? Swize emphasizes the importance of understanding that adoption is not about teaching the child the “survival” skills to approach racism, but instead to help them grow and develop despite their situation.

Another argument against minorities being placed specifically in white homes is the idea that economically and socially sound Caucasian are determining what is considered “good” for minority children. This allows for white families to feel entitled to adopt any child of any race whenever they decide, and in doing so, fail to recognize the adoptee and their culture (Smith 1996).

Previous studies have found that when it comes to transracial adoptions, the suffering of cultural communities also occurs. In 1972, the NABSW held the first annual convention speaking out against transracial adoption and its ability to inhibit minority communities. At this convention, they stated that:

“The family is the basic unit of society: one’s first, most pervasive, and

only
consistent culturing life experience. Humans develop their sense of values,
identity, self-concept, attitudes, and basic perspective within the family group.
Black children in white homes are cut off from the healthy development of
themselves as Black people, in which development is the normal expectation and
only true humanistic goal (pg 1).”

Therefore adopted children would not know instinctively how to “be black,” but instead would need to learn how to “be black,” limiting their conceptualization of race as an ascribed notion. (Samuels 2010).
Many transracial adoptees voice their thoughts on feeling like a white person, but being recognized as a minority. They are socialized in non-diverse communities, but when they are faced with racism, it is because of their minority status (Samuels 2010). Advocates argue that this is not so much of a negative realization, but instead something that needs to be fostered and addressed within adoptive families.
Some literature also points out the uncomfortable tension white parents feel in minority communities. Despite feeling unwanted in African American hair salons, Hispanic churches and Asian restaurants, it is vital that parents provide their adopted children with integrated environments and visible support services (Haymes & Smith 2003).
It is the adoptive parent’s job to respond to both positive and negative cultural experiences in a way that creates a positive response to the child’s birth culture, as well as choosing to create a living space that will not minimize the child’s respective race. In creating this environment, families can establish a healthy sense of racial and cultural identity within their adopted child (Haymes & Smith 2003).