Celebrity Transracial Adoptions - Can We Move On, Please?

I am writing as a response to what I have read on this blog and also doing some sharing of my own.

In my own family, regardless of how much my adoptive parents tried to make me feel as if I was "their own," deep down I knew I wasn't. No one had to tell me that. No one had to do anything to make me feel that way. It was just how it was. Now, as an adult, I am willing to say that yes, my adoptive parents are "my own." But I could only come to this acceptance after spending 24 years of my life in chronic emotional pain, loss, and suffering. Essentially, I had to be willing to "adopt" my parents in order to feel connected as mother/ daughter, father/daughter. My parents made the choice to adopt me long before I could consent to this arrangement. Now that I have consented as an adult, I am happy to have the parents that I have, but I am not without severe mental and emotional scars, as well as a deep sense of humiliation. Sadly, I do not think that transracial and international adoption should be viewed as a solution to solving the problem of homeless and underprivileged children because it is not a solution. It is an alternative arrangement that deviates from the more accepted biological family. Rather, transracial and international adoption are reflections of what the world is facing today. It is not a good practice, but it is also not a bad practice. But it does have consequences that should not be taken lightly or ignored. From my experience as a transracial international latina adoptee and from reading other adoption blog posts and interacting with other adoptees, I am comfortable suggesting that perhaps one of the problems that occurs in cross racial and cross cultural adoptive homes is that adopted children often do not have the opportunity to consent to being adopted. This is an issue because adopted children experience racism and cultural and societal dissociation from themselves and their family. They may experience feeling trapped, enslaved, abducted, in both a cultural and biological context. Though adoptive parents chose to consent to such an arrangement, often times they do not realize that their adopted child may decide that they don't consent to the arrangement. Also, this concept of adoptee consent begs the question, how much can a transracial/international adoptee consent to this arrangement if the social, cultural, linguistic, and biological forces against the arrangement all reinforce division not unity within the family construct? I know even though I have "consented" to the arrangement I am aware that the amount of emotional energy that I have to use when I walk down the street with my mom in order to feel socially comfortable with her as my mother is abnormal and ridiculously absurd. (I do know adoptees who do not go out in public with their family because of the amount of emotional and psychological strain it causes). Of course, it's impossible to say how an adoptee would feel in realtionship to consent if they were left in an orphanage, or placed in many foster homes, or just died. But I do know, American society is hard to live in as an adoptee. So hard, that when I visited a Mexican orphanage with my adoptive mom, (she was on a social work trip for work and I went along) during my teens I saw a a potential family and happiness in the orphanage. I saw my people. On the flip-side, one of the teens everyday would write her name next to my mom's on the blackboard and she would stand next to her. She wanted to leave the orphanage and to have a single caregiver that she could call "mom." She was probably wishing she was adopted like I was. All in all, it is not easy being a tranracial international adoptee, and it is not easy being an adopted parent, an orphan, or a foster child. In the end, I think the question is, how do we learn to manage the situations that we are presented with in life?

My husband and I adopted our first born son. He is most certainly my own, but that is not why I'm commenting.

When we started working with our lawyer, he asked us what races we were open to adopting. He said if we were willing to adopt a biracial, black or hispanic child, it would cost less and be quicker. We were shocked and disgusted by this. How can their be a monetary value placed on babies? We were so naive. Racisim exists everywhere, why wouldn't we see it in the adoption world? *sigh*

My husband was all for adopting any race. I was not so sure. We are white. We live in a predominantly white suburb. We have family members who were fearful of us adopting outside of our race. These were all factors that we had to consider.

We owed it to a child we would raise.  We ultimately matched with a woman who had a similar ethnic background as us. But, I could not stop myself from feeling like a racist, feeling guilty for the choice we made. Some people in the adoption world have called me as much. But, the truth is I care enough to know that we do not live in a society that is colorblind. 

I know that a white child is equal to a black child or a red child, or a purple child for that matter. But, we had to decide what we could give to ANY child.

As much as I know I would have loved ANY child they put in my arms, I did not know if I was equipped to deal with the challenges that my child would have had to face being the minority with white parents in an almost all white town. We were not in a position to uproot and move, turn our backs on family members and go it on our own. I don't think this makes me racist, but just the opposite. I know others would disagree. 

Great post! Interesting discussion.  

 Kelly http://www.ordinaryartblog.com 

... there are lots of things that get put into the heads of our children that come from society at large and not from their families, so I have to strongly disagree with your comment that if negative thoughts are there, they come from family members.

My husband and I have been committed from day one to making sure our daughter is connected to her culture. And, I'm sorry, she is "our own." Period. I'm sure your parents feel that you were their own, as well. That IS the reality ... just because a child is not a bio member of a family does NOT mean they are not that family's "own."

Maybe when we all stop using outdated phrases like that, the media at large will stop using that vocabulary, as well and families by adoption will not be looked on as something worthy of People magazine or other tabloids.

You're right ... there will always be issues for my daughter wondering about her birth family, but I don't want anyone suggesting she is not "my own."

 Seriously.

If you saw the comment by PBR Scribe, you would understand what I meant by that.

I think you are reading too much in to my - admittedly - not using the right usage of words and in a earlier comment, I acknowledge that. Quite frankly, as a transracial adoptee, I am really confused over your outrage over the usage of 'their own.' My parents had THEIR OWN children and adopted two. My parents have never made me personally feel that I was NOT a wanted child but you know what? I still did because when you adopt a child from a different culture / ethncity, it happens. Kids are not that dumb that they do not pick up on things, despite the effort that their parents put in to sheild them from reality.  Maybe that is why I am a bit disturbed at your comment.

I also think that your belief that an adoptee is going to read this and start questioning how they 'fit' into their family over a misuse of words is overdoing it a bit. If they do, it is because their family somehow implanted that feeling that  -you know what? They dodn't belong.

I'm sorry, I feel very strongly that people who adopt children from other cultures / ethnicities have to acknowledge that love is not enough. Your child is going to be viewed as the 'other' as soon as they walk out of the house everyday - especially if you live in an evironment where there are not a lot of people of their cultural group. However, you as the parent, based on providing love AND education / awareness / access about their cultural heritiage and providing an ear when they come to you with situations that they face from the outside world, can assist in helping them along.

Contributing Editor - Race, Ethnicity & Culture

Writing is Fighting: www.lainad.typepad.com ( http://www.lainad.typepad.com/ )

Your parents chose to "have two kids of their own" and then adopt you? The Jolie/Pitt's have three "kids of their own?" Why do you associate only biology with being one's own?

As a mother by adoption of a Chinese daughter, that makes me wonder why you would say it like that? My daughter is "my own," even though she is not my biological child. She always has been and always will be. And she knows that there are biological parents who were not allowed to keep her and we mourn that every day. That doesn't make her any less "my own child."

I think some of the questions you raise that you seem to connect to transracial adoption are really non-issues. There are no guarantees about what any of our children will be, regardless of how they come to our families.

Don't ever suggest to my daughter or any other adopted child that they are not their "parent's own" children. I am very sorry for you if you feel that way. But it really bothers me when people put this sort of language out there that so many of our kids will ultimately see or read or hear that will only suggest to them that they are somehow less a part of their families.

You ask, why would you adopt if you can have "kids of your own?" There are so many people who do and it's a good thing. Would you rather have children languishing in foster homes and orphanages around the world? Do you see that as better?

I agree with one thing -- we should move on from the fascination with the celebrity part and focus on the adoption part.

And, I think, stop with the judging part.

PunditMom ( http://punditmom1.blogspot.com )
BlogHer CE ( http://www.blogher.com/blog/punditmom )

Melissa,

Respectfully, "primary" does not mean "preliminary" in the research world. It means that these studies relied on primary data--data they themselves collected, as opposed to secondary data sources from other researchers. And as I said, during the most recent data collection point these former kids are grown up adults, some with kids of their own.

Also, I cannot speak for evvery adoption researcher doing work on different adoption forms, but the study I linked to included a range of openness from confidential to mediated (contact through an intermediary, like an adoption agency) to fully disclosed. The study goes into tremendous detail, and includes results from many, many quantitative measures as well as more open-ended, qualitative interviews.

Finally, although both of the primary investigators are, indeed, pioneers in adoption work, neither has "pushed" an open adoption agenda over others. This is a very personal matter specific to each situation, as well as one that can--and often does--change over time.

I encourage anyone interested to look at the site I linked earlier for further info.

Thanks, Nordette! I am here...and there. Like most of us I guess! LOL!

Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast ( http://blog.lib.umn.edu/perry032/impossible/ )

These are primary studies - that means preliminary.  We don't have studies that go into adulthood since open adoptions are a relatively new thing.  These results did not actually take into account the degree of openness - which is part of what I am referring to.  These results are too general in their focus to address my - and many others - concerns.

I am also suspect of the sponsorship of the studies you linked to since these were pioneers in the "Open Adoption" push.

MLO / Melissa

Glad to see you chiming in on this post.  When I saw that Laina was doing an adoption post, I thought I should send you an email to ask you to come by and share your knowledge. :-) If you hadn't dropped by before Sat., I was going to write you. 

Nordette ( http://blogher.org/blog/nordette ): BlogHer CE. Blogs @ WSATA ( http://bigsole.blogspot.com ) & UMBOP ( http://urbanpsalms.blogspot.com ). @Twitter ( http://twitter.com/nordette_verite )

 There have been no long term studies on the effects of a completely
open adoption vs. a semi-open adoption.  There is some evidence that if
the parent(s) go on to have other children that the child they gave up
is aware of it can lead to feelings of rejection that are more profound
than expected.  Again, the research is just too preliminary.

This is not true--not by a long shot. There have been several longitudinal studies looking at different types of adoptions and their impact on adoption circle members. I myself worked for one for several years--It began when the children were in middle childhood and in the most recent wave the adoptees were young adults. Please see the project's web site for more information on it and links to other research studies: MN-TX Adoption Research Project (http://cehd.umn.edu/fsos/Centers/mtarp/).

Also, the Evan B. Donaldson Institutehas resources and links related to fully disclosed and other forms of placement: http://www.adoptioninstitute.org/index.php

Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast ( http://blog.lib.umn.edu/perry032/impossible/ )

In the USA, each state has separate laws governing adoption and fostering.  Foster has the common denominator of considering reunification its goal.  Some states, Florida comes to mind, are bad for birthparents.  There are many cases of people being coerced and having no way to appeal - there is no wait period in Florida.  In other states, birthparents can come back years later and have the adoption rescinded.  This is true for both public and private adoptions.  This is one of the reasons that people are very wary of domestic adoption.  

International adoption is getting to have a wait almost as long as domestic adoptions because of increasing competition from Europe, Australia, and New Zealand.  So, the reasoning of "faster adoption" is quickly disappearing.  There is also growing evidence that a percentage of the children on the international adoption market were stolen.  (If I were to go the route of international adoption, I would strongly prefer either China or Korea because they are rather good at controlling for that.  Korea has a very good and sophisticated foster care system.  It is much, much better than the one in the USA from what I have heard.)  The Hague Convention also put a real damper on some of the more established international adoption routes.  The picture 5 years ago is completely different than now.

Domestic private adoption is a mixed thing.  There have been no long term studies on the effects of a completely open adoption vs. a semi-open adoption.  There is some evidence that if the parent(s) go on to have other children that the child they gave up is aware of it can lead to feelings of rejection that are more profound than expected.  Again, the research is just too preliminary.

What to do with the kids already damaged?  That is a much tougher challenge.  Group homes may actually be the best bet for some of them.  We are sometimes talking about kids that have no way to deal with a "normal" family life and really need to be taught it from the ground up.  No lay-parent is up to that task alone.  I think a better approach would be to prevent this sort of thing.

Parental rights should not be sacrosanct.  I would encourage foster care to refocus on the interests of the child - without regard to reunification in most cases.  (There are exceptions.)  The focus on reunification is part and parcel of the failure of the modern foster care system.  It should never take more than 6 months to terminate parental rights.  If the situation is so bad that the child is taken then there is no reason to pursue reunification - unless you can show political or malevolent activities on the part of the social worker, cops or doctor.  (I'm not naive, I know this happens.)  There needs to be a total destruction of the current system with a new system built which is truly chld-centered.

This, of course, will never happen due to the vested interests - including drug companies who get to test drugs on foster kids without consent of the foster parents who try to bring suit.  Yes, this really happened in New York.  Foster parents have no say in a child's life.  Everything must be cleared by the overworked Social Worker or some judge who may or may not be familiar with the particular case.  Group homes with in loco parentis rights would be a better option if this is the way society wants it.

The idea that just because someone gave birth to someone that custody should be preserved as the primary goal is just wrong.   

I have met many people who would make wonderful foster parents and were willing to do it - until they learned of all the very unreasonable red tape that was involved.  And, believe me, having to appeal to the court if you leave the county for a shopping trip in a tri-county area is unreasonable.  If foster parents will not be treated as in loco parentis, they should not be held responsible for these children.

On another note, there might actually be more vehemence against Jolie and Pitt if they were suffering infertility.  Nothing, but nothing, brings out the hate like infertility and chronic disease.

MLO / Melissa

 That was very insightful.

I know that in Canada, potential parents say (I'm totally generalizing from info from the people that I know) that it is easier to apply for international adoption than for domestic. They say that the waiting time is too long, and too expensive.

In your opinion, is this the same in the US? And then, what do you do with the kids that are considered too emotionally damaged from going through the system?

Contributing Editor - Race, Ethnicity & Culture

Writing is Fighting: www.lainad.typepad.com ( http://www.lainad.typepad.com/ )

Ok, there are not a lot of kids available for adoption that the majority of people are qualified to parent.

First, our society worships the biological tie to a degree that endangers children.  Period.  Parental rights are sacrosanct even in cases of severe abuse.  On average, it takes 3 years to terminate parental rights - with the stated goal of the foster system to reunite even the hardest of hard cases.  Until that changes, I cannot, in good consciouness recommend foster adopting to most people.  It literally takes a saint to do that.

 This is a particular pet peeve of mine.  I worked in the area for a short time - long enough to see horrors most outside of cops, medical personnel, and social workers never hear about.  There are absolutely NO support mechanisms in place once the adoption does take place - and few for foster parents.

Most of these children are more damaged by the system than the average person can afford to take on.

I am pro-adoption.  I also know that it is nowhere as straightforward a prospect as most people make it out to be.  We, as a society, lie to potential foster parents.  We don't inform them completely and properly about the kinds of behaviors that they may encounter - things as awful as the rather common inappropriate sexual behavior on the part of minors because they were sexually abused and believe that is normal behavior.  That is one of the less damaging behaviors potential foster parents run into.

Older foster kids tend to have very deep-seated issues because they have been both abused and bounced around.  This is part and parcel of this godawful tendency to make the sole goal of the fostering system to "repair" the parent-child relationship.

MLO / Melissa

I've thought the same thing, Megan, that people gear up to criticize her because they like Jennifer Aniston's nemesis, Jennifer appealing more as the girl next door, but they don't come out and say they've got issues with Jolie because of that. They just talk about her lips and her choices.  I guess Brad didn't have anything to do with Jennifer's broken heart. And then there's a group that jumps on Jennifer if she expresses any anger about it at all. Humans!

Nordette ( http://blogher.org/blog/nordette ): BlogHer CE. Blogs @ WSATA ( http://bigsole.blogspot.com ) & UMBOP ( http://urbanpsalms.blogspot.com ). @Twitter ( http://twitter.com/nordette_verite )

I think part of the reason Angelina Jolie gets criticized about whatever she may do is because she's still rightly or wrongly seen as the "other woman" who "stole" Brad Pitt from "sweet little" Jennifer Aniston.

Their adoptions of multi-racial children is just another weapon that the media and the public use to "punish" this "hussy" who broke up a marriage.  As you say we don't hear nearly as much about Tom Cruise and his multi-racial kids or Steven Spielberg and his.

Megan
BlogHer Contributing Editor, TV/Online Video ( http://www.blogher.com/blog/megan-smith )

Megan's Minute ( http://www.megansminute.com/ ) 

 Thanks Nordette! That is soo accurate!

If you haven't noticed before in my posts about adoption, I am extremely sensitive about the subject of white parents not teaching their children about their cultural heritage. It will really screw a kid up - I've witnessed it personally. I've also witnessed the avoidance among black families that move to the suburbs or are 'nouveau riche,' who think that their economic status somehow makes them 'above' dealing with race and racism. It happens to other people, not them and when it does, it's somehow their fault for being weak.

I am on the fence about white folks adopting children from various cultural ethnicities. There are a myriad of issues that are lost in translation between the parent and the child. Some parents will acknowledge and do what they can, and some simply don't - they have this colonialistic attitude that the child will shed their colour or their ethnicity and adopt their traits and habits.

PBR Scribe - that's exactly what I meant. I was hesistating as I wrote that paragraph and yes I admit that it didn't sound the way I meant it. Thank you for pointing that out!

Contributing Editor - Race, Ethnicity & Culture

Writing is Fighting: www.lainad.typepad.com ( http://www.lainad.typepad.com/ )

Remember the debates a while back about whites adopting black children and black social workers asserting that white parents could not teach these children about their culture. The situations in this post remind me of those debates. 

Yes, if you're going to adopt children of another ethnic background and not bother to tell them anything about their heritage, then you do them a disservice. I imagine it's more complicated when the child is of mixed heritage and the adoptive parent chooses only to see the part that looks like them.  I think some parents who adopt children of mixed ethnicity think that they can make the world a better by acting like they don't see color.  Perhaps this is Tom Cruise's issue,  I think that's a mistake. 

But it's a mistake that even some all-black families make after they get money and move to the suburbs. Some of these families seem to strip themselves and their children of all ethnic identity except skin color that cannot be escaped.  I call it mayonnaise syndrome, to make bland your roots and hope you slide off the family tree.

I don't get the "why would you adopt if you can have children" mentality. Too many children out there need homes.  If someone has the heart and soul to be a good parent and the money to adopt and wants to adopt, more power to them.

The world's eyes will probably be on all the Brangelina kids to see if they make the world a better place.

Thank you for the read, Laina.

Nordette ( http://blogher.org/blog/nordette ): BlogHer CE. Blogs @ WSATA ( http://bigsole.blogspot.com ) & UMBOP ( http://urbanpsalms.blogspot.com ). @Twitter ( http://twitter.com/nordette_verite )

 But since they have had three kids of their own...

I know from your writing and personal sensitivity that you are well versed in these issues already, Laina, but... "three biological kids" maybe? And did you mean in the next to last paragraph that these are oft-expressed concerns of outsiders to the process--concerns not always founded in fact?

At any rate--Thanks for this post. How unfortunate that folks with a national platform like Gifford can be so insensitive. So--little poverty-stricken children from far away are fair game for being snatched up and taken home by wealthy, well-meaning Americans, huh? Especially if they're cute. Well, okay. *SMH*

~~

This So-Called, Post-Post-Racial Life

http://postpostracial.wordpress.com/