Search Wikipedia Search Create account Log in

Adoption 65 languages

Contents hide Article Talk Read Edit View history Tools

(Top) From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

History (Redirected from Adopting)

Contemporary adoption
For other uses, see Adoption (disambiguation).
Parenting of adoptees
Adoption is a process whereby a person assumes the parenting of another, usually a child, from that
Development of adoptees person's biological or legal parent or parents. Legal adoptions permanently transfer all rights and
Reform and reunion trends responsibilities, along with filiation, from the biological parents to the adoptive parents.

Cultural variations Unlike guardianship or other systems designed for the care of the young, adoption is intended to effect a
Homecoming Day permanent change in status and as such requires societal recognition, either through legal or religious
sanction. Historically, some societies have enacted specific laws governing adoption, while others used less
See also
formal means (notably contracts that specified inheritance rights and parental responsibilities without an
References accompanying transfer of filiation). Modern systems of adoption, arising in the 20th century, tend to be
Further reading governed by comprehensive statutes and regulations.

History [ edit ]

Antiquity [ edit ]

Adoption for the well-born

Sister Irene of New York Foundling
While the modern form of adoption emerged in the United States, forms of the practice appeared throughout
Hospital with children. Sister Irene is among
history. The Code of Hammurabi, for example, details the rights of adopters and the responsibilities of the pioneers of modern adoption,
adopted individuals at length. The practice of adoption in ancient Rome is well-documented in the Codex establishing a system to board out children
Justinianus.[1][2] rather than institutionalize them.

Markedly different from the modern period, ancient adoption practices put emphasis on the political and
economic interests of the adopter,[3] providing a legal tool that strengthened political ties between wealthy families and
created male heirs to manage estates.[4][5] The use of adoption by the aristocracy is well-documented: many of Rome's
emperors were adopted sons.[5] Adrogation was a kind of Roman adoption in which the person adopted consented to be
adopted by another.

Infant adoption during Antiquity appears rare.[3][6] Abandoned children were often picked up for slavery[7] and composed
a significant percentage of the Empire's slave supply.[8][9] Roman legal records indicate that foundlings were occasionally
taken in by families and raised as a son or daughter. Although not normally adopted under Roman Law, the children,
called alumni, were reared in an arrangement similar to guardianship, being considered the property of the father who
abandoned them.[10]

Other ancient civilizations, notably India and China, used some form of adoption as well. Evidence suggests the goal of Trajan became emperor of
this practice was to ensure the continuity of cultural and religious practices; in contrast to the Western idea of extending Rome through adoption by
the previous emperor Nerva,
family lines. In ancient India, secondary sonship, clearly denounced by the Rigveda,[11] continued, in a limited and highly
and was in turn succeeded by
ritualistic form, so that an adopter might have the necessary funerary rites performed by a son.[12] China had a similar his own adopted son Hadrian.
idea of adoption with males adopted solely to perform the duties of ancestor worship.[13] Adoption was a customary
practice of the Roman Empire
The practice of adopting the children of family members and close friends was common among the cultures of Polynesia that enabled peaceful
including Hawaii where the custom was referred to as hānai. transitions of power.

Middle ages to modern period [ edit ]

Adoption and commoners

The nobility of the Germanic, Celtic, and Slavic cultures that dominated Europe after the decline of the Roman
Empire denounced the practice of adoption.[14] In medieval society, bloodlines were paramount; a ruling dynasty
lacking a "natural-born" heir apparent was replaced, a stark contrast to Roman traditions. The evolution of
European law reflects this aversion to adoption. English common law, for instance, did not permit adoption since
it contradicted the customary rules of inheritance. In the same vein, France's Napoleonic Code made adoption
difficult, requiring adopters to be over the age of 50, sterile, older than the adopted person by at least 15 years,
and to have fostered the adoptee for at least six years.[15] Some adoptions continued to occur, however, but
became informal, based on ad hoc contracts. For example, in the year 737, in a charter from the town of Lucca,
three adoptees were made heirs to an estate. Like other contemporary arrangements, the agreement stressed
the responsibility of the adopted rather than adopter, focusing on the fact that, under the contract, the adoptive At the monastery gate (Am
Klostertor) by Ferdinand Georg
father was meant to be cared for in his old age; an idea that is similar to the conceptions of adoption under
Waldmüller
Roman law.[16]

Europe's cultural makeover marked a period of significant innovation for adoption. Without support from the nobility, the practice gradually shifted toward
abandoned children. Abandonment levels rose with the fall of the empire and many of the foundlings were left on the doorstep of the Church.[17] Initially,
the clergy reacted by drafting rules to govern the exposing, selling, and rearing of abandoned children. The Church's innovation, however, was the
practice of oblation, whereby children were dedicated to lay life within monastic institutions and reared within a monastery. This created the first system in
European history in which abandoned children did not have legal, social, or moral disadvantages. As a result, many of Europe's abandoned and
orphaned children became alumni of the Church, which in turn took the role of adopter. Oblation marks the beginning of a shift toward institutionalization,
eventually bringing about the establishment of the foundling hospital and orphanage.[17]

As the idea of institutional care gained acceptance, formal rules appeared about how to place children into families: boys could become apprenticed to
an artisan and girls might be married off under the institution's authority.[18] Institutions informally adopted out children as well, a mechanism treated as a
way to obtain cheap labor, demonstrated by the fact that when the adopted died their bodies were returned by the family to the institution for burial.[19]

This system of apprenticeship and informal adoption extended into the 19th century, today seen as a transitional phase for adoption history. Under the
direction of social welfare activists, orphan asylums began to promote adoptions based on sentiment rather than work; children were placed out under
agreements to provide care for them as family members instead of under contracts for apprenticeship.[20] The growth of this model is believed to have
contributed to the enactment of the first modern adoption law in 1851 by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, unique in that it codified the ideal of the
"best interests of the child".[21][22] Despite its intent, though, in practice, the system operated much the same as earlier incarnations. The experience of
the Boston Female Asylum (BFA) is a good example, which had up to 30% of its charges adopted out by 1888.[23] Officials of the BFA noted that,
although the asylum promoted otherwise, adoptive parents did not distinguish between indenture and adoption: "We believe," the asylum officials said,
"that often, when children of a younger age are taken to be adopted, the adoption is only another name for service."[24]

Modern period [ edit ]

Adopting to create a family

The next stage of adoption's evolution fell to the emerging nation of the United States. Rapid immigration and the American Civil War resulted in
unprecedented overcrowding of orphanages and foundling homes in the mid-nineteenth century. Charles Loring Brace, a Protestant minister, became
appalled by the legions of homeless waifs roaming the streets of New York City. Brace considered the abandoned youth, particularly Catholics, to be the
most dangerous element challenging the city's order.[25][26] His solution was outlined in The Best Method of Disposing of Our Pauper and Vagrant
Children (1859), which started the Orphan Train movement. The orphan trains eventually shipped an estimated 200,000 children from the urban centers
of the East to the nation's rural regions.[27] The children were generally indentured, rather than adopted, to families who took them in.[28] As in times past,
some children were raised as members of the family while others were used as farm laborers and household servants. The sheer size of the
displacement—the largest migration of children in history—and the degree of exploitation that occurred, gave rise to new agencies and a series of laws
that promoted adoption arrangements rather than indenture. The hallmark of the period is Minnesota's adoption law of 1917, which mandated
investigation of all placements and limited record access to those involved in the adoption.[29][30]

During the same period, the Progressive movement swept the United States with a critical goal of ending the prevailing orphanage system. The
culmination of such efforts came with the First White House Conference on the Care of Dependent Children called by President Theodore Roosevelt in
1909,[31] where it was declared that the nuclear family represented "the highest and finest product of civilization" and was best able to serve as primary
caretaker for the abandoned and orphaned.[32][33] As late as 1923, only two percent of children without parental care were in adoptive homes, with the
balance in foster arrangements and orphanages. Less than forty years later, nearly one-third were in adoptive homes.[34]

Nevertheless, the popularity of eugenic ideas in America put up obstacles to the growth of adoption.[35][36] There were grave concerns about the genetic
quality of illegitimate and indigent children, perhaps best exemplified by the influential writings of Henry H. Goddard, who protested against adopting
children of unknown origin, saying,

Now it happens that some people are interested in the welfare and high development of the human race; but leaving aside those
exceptional people, all fathers and mothers are interested in the welfare of their own families. The dearest thing to the parental heart is to
have the children marry well and rear a noble family. How short-sighted it is then for such a family to take into its midst a child whose
pedigree is absolutely unknown; or, where, if it were partially known, the probabilities are strong that it would show poor and diseased stock,
and that if a marriage should take place between that individual and any member of the family the offspring would be degenerates.[37]

The period 1945 to 1974, the baby scoop era, saw rapid growth and acceptance of adoption as a means to build a family.[38] Illegitimate births rose
three-fold after World War II, as sexual mores changed. Simultaneously, the scientific community began to stress the dominance of nurture over genetics,
chipping away at eugenic stigmas.[39][40] In this environment, adoption became the obvious solution for both unwed people and infertile couples.[41]

Taken together, these trends resulted in a new American model for adoption. Following its Roman predecessor, Americans severed the rights of the
original parents while making adopters the new parents in the eyes of the law. Two innovations were added: 1) adoption was meant to ensure the "best
interests of the child", the seeds of this idea can be traced to the first American adoption law in Massachusetts,[15][22] and 2) adoption became infused
with secrecy, eventually resulting in the sealing of adoption and original birth records by 1945. The origin of the move toward secrecy began with Charles
Loring Brace, who introduced it to prevent children from the Orphan Trains from returning to or being reclaimed by their parents. Brace feared the impact
of the parents' poverty, in general, and Catholic religion, in particular, on the youth. This tradition of secrecy was carried on by the later Progressive
reformers when drafting of American laws.[42]

The number of adoptions in the United States peaked in 1970.[43] It is uncertain what caused the subsequent decline. Likely contributing factors in the
1960s and 1970s include a decline in the fertility rate, associated with the introduction of the pill, the completion of legalization of artificial birth control
methods, the introduction of federal funding to make family planning services available to the young and low-income, and the legalization of abortion. In
addition, the years of the late 1960s and early 1970s saw a dramatic change in society's view of illegitimacy and in the legal rights[44] of those born
outside of wedlock. In response, family preservation efforts grew[45] so that few children born out of wedlock today are adopted. Ironically, adoption is far
more visible and discussed in society today, yet it is less common.[46]

The American model of adoption eventually proliferated globally. England and Wales established their first formal adoption law in 1926. The Netherlands
passed its law in 1956. Sweden made adoptees full members of the family in 1959. West Germany enacted its first laws in 1977.[47] Additionally, the
Asian powers opened their orphanage systems to adoption, influenced as they were by Western ideas following colonial rule and military occupation.[48]
In France, local public institutions accredit candidates for adoption, who can then contact orphanages abroad or ask for the support of NGOs. The
system does not involve fees, but gives considerable power to social workers whose decisions may restrict adoption to "standard" families (middle-age,
medium to high income, heterosexual, Caucasian).[49]

Adoption is today practiced globally. The table below provides a snapshot of Western adoption rates. Adoption in the United States still occurs at rates
nearly three times those of its peers even though the number of children awaiting adoption has held steady in recent years, between 100,000 and
125,000 during the period 2009 to 2018.[50]

Adoptions, live births and adoption/live birth ratios for a number of Western countries
Country Adoptions Live births Adoption/live birth ratio Notes

Australia 270 (2007–2008)[51] 254,000 (2004)[52] 0.2 per 100 live births Includes known relative adoptions
England & Includes all adoption orders in England and
4,764 (2006)[53] 669,601(2006)[54] 0.7 per 100 live births
Wales Wales
Iceland between 20 and 35 year[55] 4,560 (2007)[56] 0.8 per 100 live births

92 non-family adoptions; 171 family

adoptions (e.g. stepparent). Not included:
Ireland 263 (2003)[57] 61,517 (2003)[58] 0.4 per 100 live births
459 international adoptions were also
recorded.

Italy 3,158 (2006)[59] 560,010 (2006)[60] 0.6 per 100 live births
Breakdown: 50 non-relative, 50 relative, 17
step-parent, 12 surrogacy, 1 foster parent,
New Zealand 154 (2012/13) [61] 59,863 (2012/13) [62] 0.26 per 100 live births
18 international relative, 6 international
non-relative
Adoptions breakdown: 438 inter-country;
Norway 657 (2006)[63] 58,545 (2006)[64] 1.1 per 100 live births
174 stepchildren; 35 foster; 10 other.
10–20 of these were national adoptions of
Sweden 1044 (2002)[65] 91,466 (2002)[66] 1.1 per 100 live births infants. The rest were international
adoptions.

The number of adoptions is reported to be

constant since 1987. Since 2000, adoption
by type has generally been approximately
15% international adoptions, 40% from
United
approx 136,000 (2008)[67] 3,978,500 (2015)[68] ≈3 per 100 live births government agencies responsible for child
States
welfare, and 45% other, such as voluntary
adoptions through private adoption
agencies or by stepparents and other family
members.[67]

Contemporary adoption [ edit ]

Forms of adoption [ edit ]

Contemporary adoption practices can be open or closed.

Open adoption allows identifying information to be communicated between adoptive and biological parents and, perhaps, interaction between kin and
the adopted person.[69] Open adoption can be an informal arrangement subject to termination by adoptive parents who have sole custody over the
child. In some jurisdictions, the biological and adoptive parents may enter into a legally enforceable and binding agreement concerning visitation,
exchange of information, or other interaction regarding the child.[70] As of February 2009, 24 U.S. states allowed legally enforceable open adoption
contract agreements to be included in the adoption finalization.[71]
The practice of closed adoption (also called confidential or secret adoption),[72] which has not been the norm for most of modern history,[73] seals all
identifying information, maintaining it as secret and preventing disclosure of the adoptive parents', biological kin's, and adoptees' identities.
Nevertheless, closed adoption may allow the transmittal of non-identifying information such as medical history and religious and ethnic
background.[74] Today, as a result of safe haven laws passed by some U.S. states, secret adoption is seeing renewed influence. In so-called "safe-
haven" states, infants can be left anonymously at hospitals, fire departments, or police stations within a few days of birth, a practice criticized by some
adoption advocacy organizations as being retrograde and dangerous.[75]

How adoptions originate [ edit ]

Adoptions can occur between related or unrelated individuals. Historically, most adoptions occurred within a
family. The most recent data from the U.S. indicates that about half of adoptions are currently between related
individuals.[76] A common example of this is a "step-parent adoption", where the new partner of a parent legally
adopts a child from the parent's previous relationship. Intra-family adoption can also occur through surrender, as
a result of parental death, or when the child cannot otherwise be cared for and a family member agrees to take
over.

Adoption is not always a voluntary process. In some countries, for example in the U.K., one of the main origins of
children being placed for adoption is that they have been removed from the birth home, often by a government
body such as the local authority. There are a number of reasons why children are removed including abuse and Josephine Baker adopted 10
neglect, which can have a lasting impact on the adoptee. Social workers in many cases will be notified of a children in the 1960s. In this photo they
safeguarding concern in relation to a child and will make enquiries into the child's well-being. Social workers will are on a tour of Amsterdam in 1964.

often seek means of keeping a child together with the birth family, for example, by providing additional support to
the family before considering removal of a child. A court of law will often then make decisions regarding the
child's future, for example, whether they can return to the birth family, enter into foster care or be adopted.

Infertility is the main reason parents seek to adopt children they are not related to. One study shows this
accounted for 80% of unrelated infant adoptions and half of adoptions through foster care.[77] Estimates suggest
that 11–24% of Americans who cannot conceive or carry to term attempt to build a family through adoption, and
that the overall rate of never-married American women who adopt is about 1.4%.[78][79] Other reasons people
adopt are numerous although not well documented. These may include wanting to cement a new family following
divorce or death of one parent, compassion motivated by religious or philosophical conviction, to avoid
The New York Foundling Home is
contributing to overpopulation out of the belief that it is more responsible to care for otherwise parent-less among North America's oldest adoption
children than to reproduce, to ensure that inheritable diseases (e.g., Tay–Sachs disease) are not passed on, and agencies.
health concerns relating to pregnancy and childbirth. Although there are a range of reasons, the most recent
study of experiences of women who adopt suggests they are most likely to be 40–44 years of age, to be currently married, to have impaired fertility, and
to be childless.[80]

Unrelated adoptions may occur through the following mechanisms:

Private domestic adoptions: under this arrangement, charities and for-profit organizations act as intermediaries, bringing together prospective
adoptive parents with families who want to place a child, all parties being residents of the same country. Alternatively, prospective adoptive parents
sometimes avoid intermediaries and connect with women directly, often with a written contract; this is not permitted in some jurisdictions. Private
domestic adoption accounts for a significant portion of all adoptions; in the United States, for example, nearly 45% of adoptions are estimated to have
been arranged privately.[81]
Foster care adoption: this is a type of domestic adoption where a child is initially placed in public care. Many
times the foster parents take on the adoption when the children become legally free. Its importance as an
avenue for adoption varies by country. Of the 127,500 adoptions in the U.S. in 2000,[81] about 51,000 or 40%
were through the foster care system.[82]
International adoption: this involves the placing of a child for adoption outside that child's country of birth.
This can occur through public or private agencies. In some countries, such as Sweden, these adoptions
account for the majority of cases (see above table). The U.S. example, however, indicates there is wide
variation by country since adoptions from abroad account for less than 15% of its cases.[81] More than Children associated with Hope and
60,000 Russian children have been adopted in the United States since 1992,[83] and a similar number of Homes for Children, a foster care
Chinese children were adopted from 1995 to 2005.[84] The laws of different countries vary in their willingness program in Ukraine

to allow international adoptions. Recognizing the difficulties and challenges associated with international
adoption, and in an effort to protect those involved from the corruption and exploitation which sometimes accompanies it, the Hague Conference on
Private International Law developed the Hague Adoption Convention, which came into force on 1 May 1995 and has been ratified by 105 countries as
of February 2024.[85]
Embryo adoption: based on the donation of embryos remaining after one couple's in vitro fertilization treatments have been completed; embryos are
given to another individual or couple, followed by the placement of those embryos into the recipient woman's uterus, to facilitate pregnancy and
childbirth. In the United States, embryo adoption is governed by property law rather than by the court systems, in contrast to traditional adoption.
Common law adoption: this is an adoption that has not been recognized beforehand by the courts, but where a parent, without resorting to any formal
legal process, leaves his or her children with a friend or relative for an extended period of time.[86][87] At the end of a designated term of (voluntary)
co-habitation, as witnessed by the public, the adoption is then considered binding, in some courts of law, even though not initially sanctioned by the
court. The particular terms of a common-law adoption are defined by each legal jurisdiction. For example, the U.S. state of California recognizes
common law relationships after co-habitation of 2 years. The practice is called "private fostering" in Britain.[88]

Disruption and dissolution [ edit ]

Main article: Disruption (adoption)

Although adoption is often described as forming a "forever" family, the relationship can be ended at any time. The legal termination of an adoption is
called disruption. In U.S. terminology, adoptions are disrupted if they are ended before being finalized, and they are dissolved if the relationship is ended
afterwards. It may also be called a failed adoption. After legal finalization, the disruption process is usually initiated by adoptive parents via a court
petition and is analogous to divorce proceedings. It is a legal avenue unique to adoptive parents as disruption/dissolution does not apply to biological kin,
although biological family members are sometimes disowned or abandoned.[89]

Ad hoc studies performed in the U.S., however, suggest that between 10 and 25 percent of adoptions through the child welfare system (e.g., excluding
babies adopted from other countries or step-parents adopting their stepchildren) disrupt before they are legally finalized and from 1 to 10 percent are
dissolved after legal finalization. The wide range of values reflects the paucity of information on the subject and demographic factors such as age; it is
known that teenagers are more prone to having their adoptions disrupted than young children.[89]

Adoption by same-sex couples [ edit ]

Main article: LGBT adoption

Joint adoption by same-sex couples is legal in 34 countries as of March 2022, and additionally in
various sub-national territories. Adoption may also be in the form of step-child adoption (6 additional
countries), wherein one partner in a same-sex couple adopts the child of the other. Most countries
that have same-sex marriage allow joint adoption by those couples, the exceptions being Ecuador
(no adoption by same-sex couples), Taiwan (step-child adoption only) and Mexico (in one third of
states with same-sex marriage). A few countries with civil unions or lesser marriage rights
nonetheless allow step- or joint adoption.In 2019, the ACS enhanced its approach to measuring
same-sex couple households, explicitly distinguishing between same-sex and opposite-sex spouses
Legal status of adoption by same-sex couples
or partners. around the world:
Joint adoption allowed
Same-sex parents, according to the ACS, were predominantly female. Notably, 22.5% of female
Second-parent adoption allowed
same-sex couple households had children under 18, in contrast to 6.6% of male same-sex couple No laws allowing adoption by same-sex couples
households. In homes with children, neither male nor female same-sex couples were more likely to and no same-sex marriage
have biological children, but male same-sex couples were more likely to adopt children and less Same-sex marriage but adoption by married
same-sex couples not allowed
likely to have stepchildren.[citation needed]

Parenting of adoptees [ edit ]

Parenting [ edit ]

The biological relationship between a parent and child is important, and the separation of the two has led to concerns about adoption. The traditional
view of adoptive parenting received empirical support from a Princeton University study of 6,000 adoptive, step, and foster families in the United States
and South Africa from 1968 to 1985; the study indicated that food expenditures in households with mothers of non-biological children (when controlled for
income, household size, hours worked, age, etc.) were significantly less for adoptees, step-children, and foster children, causing the researchers to
speculate that people are less interested in sustaining the genetic lines of others.[90] This theory is supported in another more qualitative study wherein
adoptive relationships marked by sameness in likes, personality, and appearance, were associated with both adult adoptees and adoptive parents
reporting being happier with the adoption.[91]

Other studies provide evidence that adoptive relationships can form along other lines. A study evaluating the level of parental investment indicates
strength in adoptive families, suggesting that parents who adopt invest more time in their children than other parents, and concludes "...adoptive parents
enrich their children's lives to compensate for the lack of biological ties and the extra challenges of adoption."[92] Another recent study found that adoptive
families invested more heavily in their adopted children, for example, by providing further education and financial support. Noting that adoptees seemed
to be more likely to experience problems such as drug addiction, the study speculated that adoptive parents might invest more in adoptees not because
they favor them, but because they are more likely than genetic children to need the help.[93]

Psychologists' findings regarding the importance of early mother-infant bonding created some concern about whether parents who adopt older infants or
toddlers after birth have missed some crucial period for the child's development. However, research on The Mental and Social Life of Babies suggested
that the "parent-infant system", rather than a bond between biologically related individuals, is an evolved fit between innate behavior patterns of all
human infants and equally evolved responses of human adults to those infant behaviors. Thus nature "ensures some initial flexibility with respect to the
particular adults who take on the parental role."[94]

Beyond the foundational issues, the unique questions posed for adoptive parents are varied. They include how to respond to stereotypes, answering
questions about heritage, and how best to maintain connections with biological kin when in an open adoption.[95] One author suggests a common
question adoptive parents have is: "Will we love the child even though he/she is not our biological child?"[96] A specific concern for many parents is
accommodating an adoptee in the classroom.[97] Familiar lessons like "draw your family tree" or "trace your eye color back through your parents and
grandparents to see where your genes come from" could be hurtful to children who were adopted and do not know this biological information. Numerous
suggestions have been made to substitute new lessons, e.g., focusing on "family orchards".[98]

Adopting older children presents other parenting issues.[99] Some children from foster care have histories of maltreatment, such as physical and
psychological neglect, physical abuse, and sexual abuse, and are at risk of developing psychiatric problems.[100][101] Such children are at risk of
developing a disorganized attachment.[102][103][104] Studies by Cicchetti et al. (1990, 1995) found that 80% of abused and maltreated infants in their
sample exhibited disorganized attachment styles.[105][106] Disorganized attachment is associated with a number of developmental problems, including
dissociative symptoms,[107] as well as depressive, anxious, and acting-out symptoms.[108][109] "Attachment is an active process—it can be secure or
insecure, maladaptive or productive."[110] In the U.K., some adoptions fail because the adoptive parents do not get sufficient support to deal with difficult,
traumatized children. This is a false economy as local authority care for these children is extremely expensive.[111]

Concerning developmental milestones, studies from the Colorado Adoption Project examined genetic influences on adoptee maturation, concluding that
cognitive abilities of adoptees reflect those of their adoptive parents in early childhood but show little similarity by adolescence, resembling instead those
of their biological parents and to the same extent as peers in non-adoptive families.[112]

Similar mechanisms appear to be at work in the physical development of adoptees. Danish and American researchers conducting studies on the genetic
contribution to body mass index found correlations between an adoptee's weight class and his biological parents' BMI while finding no relationship with
the adoptive family environment. Moreover, about one-half of inter-individual differences were due to individual non-shared influences.[113][114]

These differences in development appear to play out in the way young adoptees deal with major life events. In the case of parental divorce, adoptees
have been found to respond differently from children who have not been adopted. While the general population experienced more behavioral problems,
substance use, lower school achievement, and impaired social competence after parental divorce, the adoptee population appeared to be unaffected in
terms of their outside relationships, specifically in their school or social abilities.[115]

Recent research has shown that adoptive parenting may have impacts on adoptive children, it has been shown that warm adoptive parenting reduces
internalizing and externalizing problems of the adoptive children over time.[116] Another study shows that warm adoptive parenting at 27 months predicted
lower levels of child externalizing problems at ages 6 and 7.[117]

Effects on the original parents [ edit ]

Several factors affect the decision to release or raise the child. White adolescents tend to give up their babies to non-relatives, whereas black
adolescents are more likely to receive support from their own community in raising the child and also in the form of informal adoption by relatives.[118]
Studies by Leynes and by Festinger and Young, Berkman, and Rehr found that, for pregnant adolescents, the decision to release the child for adoption
depended on the attitude toward adoption held by the adolescent's mother.[119] Another study found that pregnant adolescents whose mothers had a
higher level of education were more likely to release their babies for adoption. Research suggests that women who choose to release their babies for
adoption are more likely to be younger, enrolled in school, and have lived in a two-parent household at age 10, than those who kept and raised their
babies.[120]

There is limited research on the consequences of adoption for the original parents, and the findings have been mixed. One study found that those who
released their babies for adoption were less comfortable with their decision than those who kept their babies. However, levels of comfort over both
groups were high, and those who released their child were similar to those who kept their child in ratings of life satisfaction, relationship satisfaction, and
positive future outlook for schooling, employment, finances, and marriage.[121] Subsequent research found that adolescent mothers who chose to release
their babies for adoption were more likely to experience feelings of sorrow and regret over their decision than those who kept their babies. However,
these feelings decreased significantly from one year after birth to the end of the second year.[122]

More recent research found that in a sample of mothers who had released their children for adoption four to 12 years prior, every participant had frequent
thoughts of their lost child. For most, thoughts were both negative and positive in that they produced both feelings of sadness and joy. Those who
experienced the greatest portion of positive thoughts were those who had open, rather than closed or time-limited mediated, adoptions.[123]

In another study that compared mothers who released their children to those who raised them, mothers who released their children were more likely to
delay their next pregnancy, to delay marriage, and to complete job training. However, both groups reached lower levels of education than their peers who
were never pregnant.[124] Another study found similar consequences for choosing to release a child for adoption. Adolescent mothers who released their
children were more likely to reach a higher level of education and to be employed than those who kept their children. They also waited longer before
having their next child.[122] Most of the research that exists on adoption effects on the birth parents was conducted with samples of adolescents, or with
women who were adolescents when carrying their babies—little data exists for birth parents from other populations. Furthermore, there is a lack of
longitudinal data that may elucidate long-term social and psychological consequences for birth parents who choose to place their children for adoption.

Development of adoptees [ edit ]

Previous research on adoption has led to assumptions that indicate that there is a heightened risk in terms of psychological development and social
relationships for adoptees. Yet, such assumptions have been clarified as flawed due to methodological failures. But more recent studies have been
supportive in indicating more accurate information and results about the similarities, differences and overall lifestyles of adoptees.[125] Adoptees are four
times more likely to attempt suicide than other people. [126]

Evidence about the development of adoptees can be supported in newer studies. It can be said that adoptees, in some respect, tend to develop
differently from the general population. This can be seen in many aspects of life, but usually can be found as a greater risk around the time of
adolescence. For example, it has been found that many adoptees experience difficulty in establishing a sense of identity.[127]

Identity [ edit ]

There are many ways in which the concept of identity can be defined. It is true in all cases that identity construction is an ongoing process of
development, change and maintenance of identifying with the self. Research has shown that adolescence is a time of identity progression rather than
regression.[128] One's identity tends to lack stability in the beginning years of life but gains a more stable sense in later periods of childhood and
adolescence. Typically associated with a time of experimentation, there are endless factors that go into the construction of one's identity. As well as being
many factors, there are many types of identities one can associate with. Some categories of identity include gender, sexuality, class, racial and religious,
etc. For transracial and international adoptees, tension is generally found in the categories of racial, ethnic and national identification. Because of this,
the strength and functionality of family relationships play a huge role in its development and outcome of identity construction. Transracial and
transnational adoptees tend to develop feelings of a lack of acceptance because of such racial, ethnic, and cultural differences. Therefore, exposing
transracial and transnational adoptees to their "cultures of origin" is important in order to better develop a sense of identity and appreciation for cultural
diversity.[129] Identity construction and reconstruction for transnational adoptees the instant they are adopted. For example, based upon specific laws and
regulations of the United States, the Child Citizen Act of 2000 makes sure to grant immediate U.S. citizenship to adoptees.[129]

Identity is defined both by what one is and what one is not. Adoptees born into one family lose an identity and then borrow one from the adopting family.
The formation of identity is a complicated process and there are many factors that affect its outcome. From a perspective of looking at issues in adoption
circumstances, the people involved and affected by adoption (the biological parent, the adoptive parent and the adoptee) can be known as the "triad
members and state". Adoption may threaten triad members' sense of identity. Triad members often express feelings related to confused identity and
identity crises because of differences between the triad relationships. Adoption, for some, precludes a complete or integrated sense of self. Triad
members may experience themselves as incomplete, deficient, or unfinished. They state that they lack feelings of well-being, integration, or solidity
associated with a fully developed identity.[130]

Influences [ edit ]

Family plays a vital role in identity formation. This is not only true in childhood but also in adolescence. Identity (gender/sexual/ethnic/religious/family) is
still forming during adolescence and family holds a vital key to this. The research seems to be unanimous; a stable, secure, loving, honest and supportive
family in which all members feel safe to explore their identity is necessary for the formation of a sound identity. Transracial and International adoptions
are some factors that play a significant role in the identity construction of adoptees. Many tensions arise from relationships built between the adoptee(s)
and their family. These include being "different" from the parent(s), developing a positive racial identity, and dealing with racial/ethnic discrimination.[131] It
has been found that multicultural and transnational youth tend to identify with their parents origin of culture and ethnicity rather than their residing
location, yet it is sometimes hard to balance an identity between the two because school environments tend to lack diversity and acknowledgment
regarding such topics.[132] These tensions also tend to create questions for the adoptee, as well as the family, to contemplate. Some common questions
include what will happen if the family is more naïve to the ways of socially constructed life? Will tensions arise if this is the case? What if the very people
that are supposed to be modeling a sound identity are in fact riddled with insecurities? Ginni Snodgrass answers these questions in the following way.
The secrecy in an adoptive family and the denial that the adoptive family is different builds dysfunction into it. "... social workers and insecure adoptive
parents have structured a family relationship that is based on dishonesty, evasions and exploitation. To believe that good relationships will develop on
such a foundation is psychologically unsound" (Lawrence). Secrecy erects barriers to forming a healthy identity.[133]

The research says that the dysfunction, untruths and evasiveness that can be present in adoptive families not only makes identity formation impossible,
but also directly works against it. What effect on identity formation is present if the adoptee knows they are adopted but has no information about their
biological parents? Silverstein and Kaplan's research states that adoptees lacking medical, genetic, religious, and historical information are plagued by
questions such as "Who am I?" "Why was I born?" "What is my purpose?" This lack of identity may lead adoptees, particularly in adolescent years, to
seek out ways to belong in a more extreme fashion than many of their non-adopted peers. Adolescent adoptees are overrepresented among those who
join sub-cultures, run away, become pregnant, or totally reject their families.[134][135]

Concerning developmental milestones, studies from the Colorado Adoption Project examined genetic influences on adoptee maturation, concluding that
cognitive abilities of adoptees reflect those of their adoptive parents in early childhood but show little similarity by adolescence, resembling instead those
of their biological parents and to the same extent as peers in non-adoptive families.[112]

Similar mechanisms appear to be at work in the physical development of adoptees. Danish and American researchers conducting studies on the genetic
contribution to body mass index found correlations between an adoptee's weight class and his biological parents' BMI while finding no relationship with
the adoptive family environment. Moreover, about one-half of inter-individual differences were due to individual non-shared influences.[113][114]

These differences in development appear to play out in the way young adoptees deal with major life events. In the case of parental divorce, adoptees
have been found to respond differently from children who have not been adopted. While the general population experienced more behavioral problems,
substance use, lower school achievement, and impaired social competence after parental divorce, the adoptee population appeared to be unaffected in
terms of their outside relationships, specifically in their school or social abilities.[115]

The adoptee population does, however, seem to be more at risk for certain behavioral issues. Researchers from the University of Minnesota studied
adolescents who had been adopted and found that adoptees were twice as likely as non-adopted people to develop oppositional defiant disorder (ODD)
and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), with an 8% rate in the general population.[136][non-primary source needed] Suicide risks were also
significantly greater than the general population. Swedish researchers found both international and domestic adoptees undertook suicide at much higher
rates than non-adopted peers; with international adoptees and female international adoptees, in particular, at highest risk.[137]

Nevertheless, work on adult adoptees has found that the additional risks faced by adoptees are largely confined to adolescence. Young adult adoptees
were shown to be alike with adults from biological families and scored better than adults raised in alternative family types including single parent and
step-families.[138] Moreover, while adult adoptees showed more variability than their non-adopted peers on a range of psychosocial measures, adult
adoptees exhibited more similarities than differences with adults who had not been adopted.[139] There have been many cases of remediation or the
reversibility of early trauma. For example, in one of the earliest studies conducted, Professor Goldfarb in England concluded that some children adjust
well socially and emotionally despite their negative experiences of institutional deprivation in early childhood.[140] Other researchers also found that
prolonged institutionalization does not necessarily lead to emotional problems or character defects in all children. This suggests that there will always be
some children who fare well, who are resilient, regardless of their experiences in early childhood.[141] Furthermore, much of the research on
psychological outcomes for adoptees draws from clinical populations. This suggests that conclusions such that adoptees are more likely to have
behavioral problems such as ODD and ADHD may be biased. Since the proportion of adoptees that seek mental health treatment is small, psychological
outcomes for adoptees compared to those for the general population are more similar than some researchers propose.[142]

While adoption studies have shown that by adulthood the personalities of adopted siblings are little or no more similar than random pairs of strangers, the
parenting style of adoptive parents may still play a role in the outcome of their adoptive children. Research has suggested that adoptive parents can have
impacts on adoptees as well, several recent studies have shown that warm adoptive parenting can reduce behavioral problems of adopted children over
time.[116][117]

Mental health [ edit ]

Adopted children are more likely to experience psychological and behavioral problems than non-adopted peers.[143] Children who were older than four at
the time of their adoption experience more psychological problems than those who were younger.[144][145]

According to study in the UK, adopted children can have mental health problems that do not improve even four years after their adoption. Children with
multiple adverse childhood experiences are more likely to have mental health problems. The study suggests that to identify and tread mental health
problems early, care professionals and the adopting parents need detailed biographical information about the child's life.[144][146] Another study in the UK
suggests that adopted children are more likely to suffer from post-traumatic stress (PTS) than the general population. Their PTS symptoms depend on
the type of adverse experiences they went through and knowledge of their history offers an option for tailored support.[147][148]

Adoptees of LGBT parents [ edit ]

There is evidence that shows the adoptees of LGBT families and those in heterosexual families have no significant differences in development. One of
the main arguments used against same-sex adoption is that a child needs a mother and a father in the home to develop properly. However, a 2013 study
of predictors for psychological outcomes of adoptees showed that family type (hetero, gay, lesbian) does not affect the child's adjustment; rather the
preparedness of the adoptive parent(s), and health of relationship to partner, and other contextual factors predicted later adjustment in early placed
adoptees.[149][150] Along with this, a 2009 study showed again that sexual orientation of parents does not affect externalizing and internalized problems,
but family functioning and income can affect adjustment, especially for older adoptees.[151]

Late discovery adoptees [ edit ]

Late Discovery Adoption is a term used to describe the situation where an adopted individual first discovers that they are adopted at a later age than is
universally considered to be appropriate, often well into adulthood. Adopted individuals who discover their adoption status at a later age are referred to as
Late Discovery Adoptees (LDAs). Failure of the adoptive parent(s) to disclose adoption status to a child is an outdated adoption practice that was once
fairly common for adoptees born in the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s. Since the 1970s, it has been socially unacceptable to keep the truth from adopted
individuals regarding their genetic origins. The discovery of the deception regarding true parentage and that one is, in fact, a Late Discovery Adoptee can
add "layers of trauma, loss, betrayal, identity confusion, and disorganization upon learning the truth."[152][153]

Public perception of adoption [ edit ]

In Western culture, many see that the common image of a family being that of a heterosexual couple
with biological children. This idea places alternative family forms outside the norm. As a consequence –
research indicates – disparaging views of adoptive families exist, along with doubts concerning the
strength of their family bonds.[154][155]

The most recent adoption attitudes survey completed by the Evan Donaldson Institute provides further
evidence of this stigma. Nearly one-third of the surveyed population believed adoptees are less-well
adjusted, more prone to medical issues, and predisposed to drug and alcohol problems. Additionally,
40–45% thought adoptees were more likely to have behavior problems and trouble at school. In
contrast, the same study indicated adoptive parents were viewed favorably, with nearly 90% describing
them as "lucky, advantaged, and unselfish".[156]
Actors at the Anne of Green Gables Museum
on Prince Edward Island, Canada. Since its first
The majority of people state that their primary source of information about adoption comes from friends
publication in 1908, the story of the orphaned
and family and the news media. Nevertheless, most people report the media provides them a favorable Anne, and how the Cuthberts took her in, has
view of adoption; 72% indicated receiving positive impressions.[157] There is, however, still substantial been widely popular in the English-speaking world
and, later, Japan.
criticism of the media's adoption coverage. Some adoption blogs, for example, criticized Meet the
Robinsons for using outdated orphanage imagery[158][159] as did advocacy non-profit The Evan B.
Donaldson Adoption Institute.[160]

The stigmas associated with adoption are amplified for children in foster care.[161] Negative perceptions result in the belief that such children are so
troubled it would be impossible to adopt them and create "normal" families.[162] A 2004 report from the Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care has
shown that the number of children waiting in foster care doubled since the 1980s and now remains steady at about a half-million a year."[163]

Attitude toward Adoption Questionnaire (ATAQ):[164] this questionnaire was first developed by Abdollahzadeh, Chaloyi and Mahmoudi(2019).[165]
Preliminary Edition: This questionnaire has 23 items based on the Likert scale of 1 (totally Disagree), up to 5 (Totally Agree) being obtained after refining
the items designed to construct the present tool and per-study study. The analysis of item and initial psychometric analyses indicate that there are two
factors in it. Items 3-10-11-12-14-15-16-17-19-20-21 are reversed and the rest are graded positively. The results of exploratory factor analysis by main
components with varimax rotation indicated two components of attitude toward adoption being named respectively cognitive as the aspects of attitude
toward adoption and behavioral-emotional aspects of attitude toward adoption. These two components explained 43.25% of the variance of the total
sample. Cronbach's alpha coefficient was used to measure the reliability of the questionnaire. Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.709 for the whole
questionnaire, 0.71 for the first component, and 0.713 for the second one. In addition, there was a significant positive relationship between desired social
tendencies and the cognitive aspect of attitude toward adoption as well as the behavioral -emotional aspects of attitude toward adoption (P ≤ 0.01).

Reform and reunion trends [ edit ]

Adoption practices have changed significantly over the course of the 20th century, with each new movement labeled, in some way, as reform.[166]
Beginning in the 1970s, efforts to improve adoption became associated with opening records and encouraging family preservation. These ideas arose
from suggestions that the secrecy inherent in modern adoption may influence the process of forming an identity,[167][168] create confusion regarding
genealogy,[169] and provide little in the way of medical history.

Family preservation: As concerns over illegitimacy began to decline in the early 1970s, social-welfare agencies began to emphasize that, if possible,
mothers and children should be kept together.[170] In the U.S., this was clearly illustrated by the shift in policy of the New York Foundling Home, an
adoption-institution that is among the country's oldest and one that had pioneered sealed records. It established three new principles including "to
prevent placements of children...", reflecting the belief that children would be better served by staying with their biological families, a striking shift in policy
that remains in force today.[171] In addition, groups such as Origins USA (founded in 1997) started to actively speak about family preservation and the
rights of mothers.[172] The intellectual tone of these reform movements was influenced by the publishing of The Primal Wound by Nancy Verrier. "Primal
wound" is described as the "devastation which the infant feels because of separation from its birth mother. It is the deep and consequential feeling of
abandonment which the baby adoptee feels after the adoption and which may continue for the rest of his life."[167]

Open records: After a legal adoption in the United States, an adopted person's original birth certificate is usually amended and replaced with a new
post-adoption birth certificate. The names of any birth parents listed on the original birth certificate are replaced on an amended certificate with the
names of the adoptive parents, making it appear that the child was born to the adoptive parents.[173] Beginning in the late 1930s and continuing through
the 1970s, state laws allowed for the sealing of original birth certificates after an adoption and, except in some states, made the original birth certificate
unavailable to the adopted person even at the age of majority.[174]

Adopted people have long sought to undo these laws so that they can obtain their own original birth certificates. Movements to unseal original birth
certificates and other adoption records for adopted people proliferated in the 1970s along with increased acceptance of illegitimacy. In the United States,
Jean Paton founded Orphan Voyage in 1954, and Florence Fisher founded the Adoptees' Liberty Movement Association (ALMA) in 1971, calling sealed
records "an affront to human dignity".[175] While in 1975, Emma May Vilardi created the first mutual-consent registry, the International Soundex Reunion
Registry (ISRR), allowing those separated by adoption to locate one another.[176] and Lee Campbell and other birthmothers established CUB (Concerned
United Birthparents). Similar ideas were taking hold globally with grass-roots organizations like Parent Finders in Canada and Jigsaw in Australia. In
1975, England and Wales opened records on moral grounds.[177]

By 1979, representatives of 32 organizations from 33 states, Canada and Mexico gathered in Washington, DC, to establish the American Adoption
Congress (AAC) passing a unanimous resolution: "Open Records complete with all identifying information for all members of the adoption triad,
birthparents, adoptive parents and adoptee at the adoptee's age of majority (18 or 19, depending on state) or earlier if all members of the triad
agree."[178] Later years saw the evolution of more militant organizations such as Bastard Nation (founded in 1996), groups that helped overturn sealed
records in Alabama, Delaware, New Hampshire, Oregon, Tennessee, and Maine.[179][180] A coalition of New York and national adoptee rights activists
successfully worked to overturn a restrictive 83-year-old law in 2019, and adult adopted people born in New York, as well as their descendants, today
have the right to request and obtain their own original birth certificates.[181][182] As of 2021, ten states in the United States recognize the right of adult
adopted people to obtain their own original birth certificates, including Alabama, Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Kansas, Maine, New Hampshire, New
York, Oregon and Rhode Island.[183] Connecticut in 2021 became the tenth state to restore an adopted person's right to request and obtain their original
birth certificates.[184][185]

Reunion [ edit ]

Estimates for the extent of search behavior by adoptees have proven elusive; studies show significant variation.[186] In part, the problem stems from the
small adoptee population which makes random surveying difficult, if not impossible.

Nevertheless, some indication of the level of search interest by adoptees can be gleaned from the case of England and Wales which opened adoptees'
birth records in 1975. The U.K. Office for National Statistics has projected that 33% of all adoptees would eventually request a copy of their original birth
records, exceeding original forecasts made in 1975 when it was believed that only a small fraction of the adoptee population would request their records.
The projection is known to underestimate the true search rate, however, since many adoptees of the era get their birth records by other means.[187]

The research literature states adoptees give four reasons for desiring reunion: 1) they wish for a more complete genealogy, 2) they are curious about
events leading to their conception, birth, and relinquishment, 3) they hope to pass on information to their children, and 4) they have a need for a detailed
biological background, including medical information. It is speculated by adoption researchers, however, that the reasons given are incomplete: although
such information could be communicated by a third-party, interviews with adoptees, who sought reunion, found they expressed a need to actually meet
biological relations.[188]

It appears the desire for reunion is linked to the adoptee's interaction with and acceptance within the community. Internally focused theories suggest
some adoptees possess ambiguities in their sense of self, impairing their ability to present a consistent identity. Reunion helps resolve the lack of self-
knowledge.[189]

Externally focused theories, in contrast, suggest that reunion is a way for adoptees to overcome social stigma. First proposed by Goffman, the theory has
four parts: 1) adoptees perceive the absence of biological ties as distinguishing their adoptive family from others, 2) this understanding is strengthened
by experiences where non-adoptees suggest adoptive ties are weaker than blood ties, 3) together, these factors engender, in some adoptees, a sense of
social exclusion, and 4) these adoptees react by searching for a blood tie that reinforces their membership in the community. The externally focused
rationale for reunion suggests adoptees may be well adjusted and happy within their adoptive families, but will search as an attempt to resolve
experiences of social stigma.[188]

Some adoptees reject the idea of reunion. It is unclear, though, what differentiates adoptees who search from those who do not. One paper summarizes
the research, stating, "...attempts to draw distinctions between the searcher and non-searcher are no more conclusive or generalizable than attempts to
substantiate ... differences between adoptees and nonadoptees."[190]

In sum, reunions can bring a variety of issues for adoptees and parents. Nevertheless, most reunion results appear to be positive. In the largest study to
date (based on the responses of 1,007 adoptees and relinquishing parents), 90% responded that reunion was a beneficial experience. This does not,
however, imply ongoing relationships were formed between adoptee and parent nor that this was the goal.[191]

Controversial adoption practices [ edit ]

See also: Adoption fraud

Reform and family preservation efforts have also been strongly associated with the perceived misuse of adoption. In some cases, parents' rights have
been terminated when their ethnic or socio-economic group has been deemed unfit by society. Some of these practices were generally accepted but
have later been considered abusive; others were uncontroversially reprehensible.

Forced adoption based on ethnicity occurred during World War II. In German-occupied Poland, it is estimated that 200,000 Polish children with
purportedly Aryan traits were removed from their families and given to German or Austrian couples,[192] and only 25,000 returned to their families after
the war.[193]

The Stolen Generation of Aboriginal people in Australia were affected by similar policies,[194] as were Native Americans in the United States[195] and First
Nations of Canada.[196]

These practices have become significant social and political issues in recent years, and in many cases the policies have changed.[197][198] The United
States, for example, now has the 1978 Indian Child Welfare Act, which allows the tribe and family of a Native American child to be involved in adoption
decisions, with preference being given to adoption within the child's tribe.[199]

From the 1950s through the 1970s, a period called the baby scoop era, adoption practices that involved coercion were directed against unwed mothers,
as described for the U.S. in The Girls Who Went Away.

The military dictatorship in Argentina from 1976 to 1983 is known to have given hundreds of babies born to women captives who were then murdered to
be brought up by military families.[200]

In Spain under Francisco Franco's 1939–1975 dictatorship the newborns of some left-wing opponents of the regime, or unmarried or poor couples, were
removed from their mothers and adopted. New mothers were frequently told their babies had died suddenly after birth and the hospital had taken care of
their burials, when in fact they were given or sold to another family. It is believed that up to 300,000 babies were involved. These system—which
allegedly involved doctors, nurses, nuns and priests—outlived Franco's death in 1975 and carried on as an illegal baby trafficking network until 1987
when a new law regulating adoption was introduced.[201][202]

On January 29, 2010, a group of ten American Baptist missionaries from Idaho attempted to cross the Haiti–Dominican Republic border with 33 Haitian
children. The group, known as the New Life Children's Refuge, did not have proper authorization for transporting the children and were arrested on
kidnapping charges.[203] After the process for the adoption of 400 children by families in the US and the Netherlands was expedited,[204] Unicef and SOS
Children urged an immediate halt to adoptions from Haiti.[205][206] Jasmine Whitbread, chief executive of Save the Children said: "The vast majority of the
children currently on their own still have family members alive who will be desperate to be reunited with them and will be able to care for them with the
right support. Taking children out of the country would permanently separate thousands of children from their families—a separation that would
compound the acute trauma they are already suffering and inflict long-term damage on their chances of recovery."[205]

Adoption terminology [ edit ]

Main article: Language of adoption

The language of adoption is changing and evolving, and since the 1970s has been a controversial issue tied closely to adoption reform efforts. The
controversy arises over the use of terms which, while designed to be more appealing or less offensive to some persons affected by adoption, may
simultaneously cause offense or insult to others. This controversy illustrates the problems in adoption, as well as the fact that coining new words and
phrases to describe ancient social practices will not necessarily alter the feelings and experiences of those affected by them. Two of the contrasting sets
of terms are commonly referred to as "positive adoption language" (PAL) (sometimes called "respectful adoption language" (RAL)), and "honest adoption
language" (HAL).

Positive adoptive language (PAL) [ edit ]

In the 1970s, as adoption search and support organizations developed, there were challenges to the language in common use at the time. As books like
Adoption Triangle by Sorosky, Pannor and Baran were published, and support groups formed like CUB (Concerned United Birthparents), a major shift
from "natural parent" to "birthparent"[207][208] occurred. Along with the change in times and social attitudes came additional examination of the language
used in adoption.

Social workers and other professionals in the field of adoption began changing terms of use to reflect what was being expressed by the parties involved.
In 1979, Marietta Spencer wrote "The Terminology of Adoption" for The Child Welfare League of America (CWLA),[209] which was the basis for her later
work "Constructive Adoption Terminology".[210] This influenced Pat Johnston's "Positive Adoption Language" (PAL) and "Respectful Adoption Language"
(RAL).[211] The terms contained in "Positive Adoption Language" include the terms "birth mother" (to replace the terms "natural mother" and "real
mother"), and "placing" (to replace the term "surrender"). These kinds of recommendations encouraged people to be more aware of their use of adoption
terminology.

Honest adoption language (HAL) [ edit ]

"Honest Adoption Language" refers to a set of terms that proponents say reflect the point of view that: (1) family relationships (social, emotional,
psychological or physical) that existed prior to the legal adoption often continue past this point or endure in some form despite long periods of separation,
and that (2) mothers who have "voluntarily surrendered" children to adoption (as opposed to involuntary terminations through court-authorized child-
welfare proceedings) seldom view it as a choice that was freely made, but instead describe scenarios of powerlessness, lack of resources, and overall
lack of choice.[212][213] It also reflects the point of view that the term "birth mother" is derogatory in implying that the woman has ceased being a mother
after the physical act of giving birth. Proponents of HAL liken this to the mother being treated as a "breeder" or "incubator".[214] Terms included in HAL
include terms that were used before PAL, including "natural mother", "first mother", and "surrendered for adoption".

Inclusive adoption language [ edit ]

There are supporters of various lists, developed over many decades, and there are persons who find them lacking, created to support an agenda, or
furthering division. All terminology can be used to demean or diminish, uplift or embrace. In addressing the linguistic problem of naming, Edna Andrews
says that using "inclusive" and "neutral" language is based upon the concept that "language represents thought, and may even control thought."[215]

Advocates of inclusive language defend it as inoffensive-language usage whose goal is multi-fold:

1. The rights, opportunities, and freedoms of certain people are restricted because they are reduced to stereotypes.
2. Stereotyping is mostly implicit, unconscious, and facilitated by the availability of pejorative labels and terms.
3. Rendering the labels and terms socially unacceptable, people then must consciously think about how they describe someone unlike themselves.
4. When labeling is a conscious activity, the described person's individual merits become apparent, rather than his or her stereotype.

A common problem is that terms chosen by an identity group, as acceptable descriptors of themselves, can be used in negative ways by detractors. This
compromises the integrity of the language and turns what was intended to be positive into negative or vice versa, thus often devaluing acceptability,
meaning and use.

Language at its best honors the self-referencing choices of the persons involved, uses inclusive terms and phrases, and is sensitive to the feelings of the
primary parties. Language evolves with social attitudes and experiences.[216][217]

Cultural variations [ edit ]

Main article: Cultural variations in adoption

Attitudes and laws regarding adoption vary greatly. Whereas all cultures make arrangements whereby children whose birth parents are unavailable to
rear them can be brought up by others, not all cultures have the concept of adoption, that is treating unrelated children as equivalent to biological children
of the adoptive parents. Under Islamic Law, for example, adopted children must keep their original surname to be identified with blood relations,[218] and,
traditionally, women wear a hijab in the presence of males in their adoptive households. In Egypt, these cultural distinctions have led to making adoption
illegal opting instead for a system of foster care.[219][220]

Homecoming Day [ edit ]

In some countries, such as the United States, "Homecoming Day" is the day when an adoptee is officially united with their new adoptive family.[221]

See also [ edit ]

Main article: Outline of adoption

Adoption by celebrities Child-selling

Adoption by country Effects of adoption on the birth mother
Adoption fraud Genetic sexual attraction
Adult adoption National Adoption Day
Affiliation Notable orphans and foundlings
Attachment disorder Putative father registry
Attachment theory Reactive attachment disorder
Attachment therapy Social work
Child welfare

References [ edit ]

1. ^ Code of Hammurabi 117. ^ a b Reuben, Julia D.; Shaw, Daniel S.; Neiderhiser, Jenae M.; Natsuaki,
2. ^ Codex Justinianus Archived 14 August 2014 at the Wayback Machine Misaki N.; Reiss, David; Leve, Leslie D. (August 2016). "Warm Parenting
3. ^ a b Brodzinsky and Schecter (editors), The Psychology of Adoption , and Effortful Control in Toddlerhood: Independent and Interactive Predictors
1990, page 274 of School-Age Externalizing Behavior" . Journal of Abnormal Child
4. ^ H. David Kirk, Adoptive Kinship: A Modern Institution in Need of Reform, Psychology. 44 (6): 1083–1096. doi:10.1007/s10802-015-0096-6 .
1985, page xiv. PMC 5097859 .
5. ^ a b Benet, Mary Kathleen (1976). The Politics of Adoption. Free Press. 118. ^ Furstenburg, F.F. & Brooks-Gunn, J. (1985). Teenage childbearing:
p. 14. ISBN 9780029025000. Causes, consequences, and remedies. In L. Aiken and D. Mechanic (Eds.),
6. ^ John Boswell, The Kindness of Strangers , 1998, page 74, 115 Applications of social science to clinical medicine and health policy (pp.
307–334). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
7. ^ John Boswell, The Kindness of Strangers , 1998, page 62-63
119. ^ as cited in Kallen, D.J.; Griffore, R.J.; Popovich, S.; Powell, V. (1990).
8. ^ Scheidel, W. (28 September 2011). "The Roman Slave Supply". In
"Adolescent mothers and their mothers view adoption". Family Relations. 39
Bradley, Keith; Cartledge, Paul (eds.). The Cambridge World History of
Slavery. Cambridge University Press. (3): 311–316. doi:10.2307/584877 . JSTOR 584877 .

doi:10.1017/CHOL9780521840668.016 . 120. ^ Donnelly, B.W.; Voydanoff, P. (1996). "Parenting versus placing for
adoption: Consequences for adolescent mothers". Family Relations. 45 (4):
9. ^ John Boswell, The Kindness of Strangers , 1998, page 3
427–434. doi:10.2307/585172 . JSTOR 585172 .
10. ^ John Boswell, The Kindness of Strangers , 1998, page 53-95
121. ^ Kalmuss, D.; Namerow, P.B.; Bauer, U. (1992). "Short-term consequences
11. ^ A. Tiwari, The Hindu Law of Adoption, Central Indian Law Quarterly, Vol
of parenting versus adoption among young unmarried women". Journal of
18, 2005 Archived 5 February 2009 at the Wayback Machine
Marriage and Family. 54 (1): 80–90. doi:10.2307/353277 .
12. ^ Vinita Bhargava, Adoption in India: Policies and Experiences , 2005,
JSTOR 353277 .
page 45
122. ^ a b Donnelly, B.W. & Voydanoff, P.
13. ^ W. Menski, Comparative Law in a Global Context: The Legal Systems of
123. ^ Fravel, D.L.; McRoy, R.G.; Grotevant, H.D. (2000). "Birthmother
Asia and Africa , 2000
perceptions of the psychologically present adopted child: Adoption openness
14. ^ S. Finley-Croswhite, Review of Blood Ties and Fictive Ties, Canadian
[permanent dead link], August and boundary ambiguity". Family Relations. 49 (4): 425–433.
Journal of History 1997
doi:10.1111/j.1741-3729.2000.00425.x .
15. ^ a b Brodzinsky and Schecter (editors), The Psychology of Adoption ,
124. ^ McLaughlin, S.D.; Manninen, D.L.; Winges, L.D. (1988). "Do adolescents
1990, page 274
who relinquish their children fare better or worse than those who raise
16. ^ John Boswell, The Kindness of Strangers , 1998, page 224
them?". Family Planning Perspectives. 20 (1): 25–32.
17. ^ a b John Boswell, The Kindness of Strangers , 1998, page 184
doi:10.2307/2135594 . JSTOR 2135594 . PMID 3371467 .
18. ^ John Boswell, The Kindness of Strangers , 1998, page 420
125. ^ L. Borders, et. Adult Adoptees and Their Friends, National Council of
19. ^ John Boswell, The Kindness of Strangers , 1998, page 421.
Family Relations, 2000, Vol. 49, No. 4,
20. ^ Wayne Carp, Editor, Adoption in America, article by: Susan Porter, A Good
126. ^ Keyes, M. A.; Malone, S. M.; Sharma, A.; Iacono, W. G.; McGue, M.
Home, A Good Home , page 29.
(2013). "Risk of Suicide Attempt in Adopted and Nonadopted Offspring" .
21. ^ Wayne Carp, Editor, Adoption in America, article by: Susan Porter, A Good Pediatrics. 132 (4): 639–646. doi:10.1542/peds.2012-3251 .
Home, A Good Home , page 37. PMC 3784288 . PMID 24019414 .
22. ^ ab Ellen Herman, Adoption History Project, University of Oregon, Topic: 127. ^ Beauchesne, Lise M. (1997). As if born to: The social construction of a
Timeline Archived 15 April 2010 at the Wayback Machine deficit identity position for adopted persons (D.S.W. dissertation) Wilfrid
23. ^ Wayne Carp, Editor, Adoption in America, article by: Susan Porter, A Good Laurier University
Home, A Good Home , page 44. 128. ^ Meeus, Wim. "The Study of Adolescent Formation 2000–2010: A Review
24. ^ Wayne Carp, Editor, Adoption in America, article by: Susan Porter, A Good of Longitunal Research". Journal of Research on Adolescence. 21 (1): 88.
Home, A Good Home , page 45. 129. ^ a b Patton-Imani, Sandra (2012). "Orphan Sunday: Narratives of Salvation
25. ^ Ellen Herman, Adoption History Project, University of Oregon, Topic: in Transnational Adoption". Dialog: A Journey of Theology. 51 (4): 301.
Charles Loring Brace, The Dangerous Classes of New York and Twenty 130. ^ 24. Kaplan, Deborah N Silverstein and Sharon. Lifelong Issues in
Years' Work Among Them, 1872 Adoption.
26. ^ Charles Loring Brace, The Dangerous Classes of New York and Twenty 131. ^ Johnson, Fern L.; Mickelson, Stacie; Lopez Davila, Mariana (22
Years' Work Among Them , 1872 September 2013). "Transracial Foster Care and Adoption: Issues and
27. ^ Ellen Herman, Adoption History Project, University of Oregon, Topic: Realities". New England Journal of Public Policy. 25 (1): 2.
Charles Loring Brace Archived 19 October 2009 at the Wayback 132. ^ Bauer, Stephanie; Loomis, Colleen; Akkari, Abdeljalil (May 2012).
Machine
"Intercultural immigrant youth identities in contexts of family, friends, and
28. ^ Stephen O'Connor, Orphan Trains , Page 95 school". Journal of Youth Studies. 16 (1): 63.
29. ^ Wayne Carp (Editor), E. Adoption in America: Historical Perspectives , doi:10.1080/13676261.2012.693593 . S2CID 145615691 .
page 160 133. ^ Snodgrass, Ginni D. Research and Studies on Adoptees. Statistics on the
30. ^ Ellen Herman, Adoption History Project, University of Oregon, Topic: effects of Adoption. Appendix A. s.l. : George Fox University, 1998.
Home Studies Archived 19 October 2009 at the Wayback Machine 134. ^ Kaplan, Deborah N Silverstein and Sharon. Lifelong Issues in A.
31. ^ M. Gottlieb, The Foundling, 2001, page 76 135. ^ Adoption, and it's Associated Therapy Issues. A Literature Review
32. ^ E. Wayne Carp (Editor), Adoption in America: Historical Perspectives , discussing the impact of adoption on Self-worth, Identity and the Primary
page 108 Relationships of the Adoptee and both the Biological and Adoptive Parents.
33. ^ Ellen Herman, Adoption History Project, University of Oregon, Topic: Christine Peers 11/7/2012
Placing Out Archived 19 October 2009 at the Wayback Machine 136. ^ Kaplan, Arline, Psychiatric Times , 26 January 2009
34. ^ Bernadine Barr, "Spare Children, 1900–1945: Inmates of Orphanages as 137. ^ Annika von Borczyskowski, Suicidal behavior in national and international
Subjects of Research in Medicine and in the Social Sciences in America" adult adoptees, Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology Volume
(PhD diss., Stanford University, 1992), p. 32, figure 2.2. 41, Number 2 / February, 2006
35. ^ Ellen Herman, Adoption History Project, University of Oregon, Topic: 138. ^ William Feigelman, Comparisons with Persons Raised in Conventional
Eugenics Archived 27 August 2010 at the Wayback Machine Families, Marriage & Family Review 1540-9635, Volume 25, Issue 3, 1997,
36. ^ Lawrence and Pat Starkey, Child Welfare and Social Action in the Pages 199 – 223
Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries , 2001 page 223 139. ^ Border, L. DiAnne (2000). "Adult Adoptees and Their Friends" (PDF).
37. ^ H.H. Goddard, Excerpt from Wanted: A Child to Adopt Archived 28 Family Relations. 49 (4): 407–418. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3729.2000.00407.x .
August 2010 at the Wayback Machine JSTOR 585836 .
38. ^ E. Wayne Carp (Editor), Adoption in America: Historical Perspectives , 140. ^ Goldfarb, W. (1955). Emotional and intellectual consequences of
page 181 psychologic deprivation in infancy: A Re-evaluation. In P. Hoch & J. Zubin
39. ^ Mosher, William D.; Bachrach, Christine A. (January–February 1996). (Eds.), Psychopathology of Childhood (pp. 105–119). NY: Grune & Stratton.
"Understanding U.S. Fertility: Continuity and Change in the National Survey 141. ^ Pringel, M. L., & Bossio, V. (1960). Early, prolonged separation and
of Family Growth, 1988–1995" . Family Planning Perspectives. emotional adjustment. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 37–48
Guttmacher Institute. 28 (1): 5. Archived from the original on 24 October 142. ^ Hamilton, L. (2012). Adoption. In Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology.
2008. Retrieved from http://www.sociologyencyclopedia.com/ Archived 24 July
40. ^ Barbara Melosh, Strangers and Kin: the American Way of Adoption , 2008 at the Wayback Machine
page 106 143. ^ Duncan, Morvwen; Woolgar, Matt; Ransley, Rachel; Fearon, Pasco (1
41. ^ Barbara Melosh, Strangers and Kin: the American Way of Adoption , December 2021). "Mental health and behavioural difficulties in adopted
page 105-107 children: A systematic review of post-adoption risk and protective factors" .
42. ^ E. Wayne Carp, Family Matters: Secrecy and Disclosure in the History of Adoption & Fostering. 45 (4): 414–429. doi:10.1177/03085759211058358 .
Adoption, Harvard University Press, 2000, pages 103–104. S2CID 245473080 .
43. ^ National Council for Adoption, Adoption Fact Book, 2000, page 42, Table 144. ^ a b "Adopted children can experience lasting mental health problems" .
11 NIHR Evidence (Plain English summary). 28 August 2020.
44. ^ "US Supreme Court Cases from Justia & Oyez" . Retrieved 19 July 2011. doi:10.3310/alert_40787 . S2CID 241503976 .
45. ^ M. Gottlieb, The Foundling, 2001, page 106 145. ^ Nadeem, Erum; Waterman, Jill; Foster, Jared; Paczkowski, Emilie; Belin,
46. ^ Ellen Herman, Adoption History Project, University of Oregon, Topic: Thomas R.; Miranda, Jeanne (28 January 2016). "Long-Term Effects of Pre-
Adoption Statistics Placement Risk Factors on Children's Psychological Symptoms and
47. ^ Christine Adamec and William Pierce, The Encyclopedia of Adoption, 2nd Parenting Stress Among Families Adopting Children From Foster Care" .
Edition, 2000 Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders. 25 (2): 67–81.
48. ^ Ellen Herman, Adoption History Project, University of Oregon, Topic: doi:10.1177/1063426615621050 . ISSN 1063-4266 . PMC 5734114 .
International Adoption PMID 29263641 .
49. ^ Bruno Perreau, The Politics of Adoption: Gender and the Making of French 146. ^ Paine, Amy L.; Fahey, Kevin; Anthony, Rebecca E.; Shelton, Katherine H.
Citizenship , MIT Press, 2014. (1 May 2021). "Early adversity predicts adoptees' enduring emotional and
50. ^ U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,U.S. Trends in Foster behavioral problems in childhood" . European Child & Adolescent
Care and Adoption Psychiatry. 30 (5): 721–732. doi:10.1007/s00787-020-01553-0 .
ISSN 1435-165X . PMC 8060221 . PMID 32468437 .
51. ^ Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Adoptions Australia 2003–04
Archived 10 October 2009 at the Wayback Machine, Child Welfare Series 147. ^ "Adopted children may develop specific types of post-traumatic stress" .

Number 35. NIHR Evidence (Plain English summary). 3 August 2021.

doi:10.3310/alert_47378 . S2CID 242996830 .
52. ^ Australian Bureau of Statistics,Population and Household
Characteristics 148. ^ Anthony, R.; Paine, A.L.; Westlake, M.; Lowthian, E.; Shelton, K.H. (7
November 2020). "Patterns of adversity and post-traumatic stress among
53. ^ UK Office for National Statistics, Adoption Data Archived 11 January
children adopted from care" . Child Abuse & Neglect. 130 (Pt 2): 104795.
2009 at the Wayback Machine
doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.104795 . PMID 33172646 .
54. ^ UK Office for National Statistics, Live Birth Data
S2CID 226304165 .
55. ^ Íslensk Ættleiðing,Adoption Numbers Archived 23 April 2011 at the
149. ^ Farr, Rachel H.; Patterson, Charlotte J. (2013). "Lesbian and Gay Adoptive
Wayback Machine
Parents and Their Children". In Goldberg, Abbie E.; Allen, Katherine R.
56. ^ Statistics Iceland,Births and Deaths
(eds.). LGBT-Parent Families: Innovations in Research and Implications for
57. ^ Adoption Authority of Ireland,Report of The Adoption Board 2003
Practice. New York, NY: Springer. pp. 39–55. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-4556-
Archived 11 March 2006 at the Wayback Machine
2_3 . ISBN 978-1-4614-4556-2.
58. ^ Central Statistics Office Ireland,Births, Deaths, Marriages Archived 10
150. ^ Averett, Paige; Nalavany, Blace; Ryan, Scott (30 November 2009). "An
May 2008 at the Wayback Machine
Evaluation of Gay/Lesbian and Heterosexual Adoption" . Adoption
59. ^ Tom Kington, Families in Rush to Adopt a Foreign Child , Guardian, 28
Quarterly. 12 (3–4): 129–151. doi:10.1080/10926750903313278 .
January 2007
ISSN 1092-6755 . S2CID 143679873 .
60. ^ Demo Istat, Demographic Balance Archived 16 June 2008 at the
151. ^ Goldberg, Abbie E.; Smith, JuliAnna Z. (2013). "Predictors of psychological
Wayback Machine, 2006
adjustment in early placed adopted children with lesbian, gay, and
61. ^ "Adoptions Data" . Department of Child, Youth and Family. Archived from
heterosexual parents" . Journal of Family Psychology. 27 (3): 431–442.
the original on 26 October 2014. Retrieved 1 March 2014.
doi:10.1037/a0032911 . ISSN 1939-1293 . PMID 23750525 .
62. ^ "Live births (by sex), stillbirths (Maori and total population) (Annual-Jun) –
152. ^ "A safe space for Late Discovery Adoptees or anyone who has made an
Infoshare" . Statistics New Zealand. Retrieved 1 March 2014.
unexpected discovery about their parentage" . latediscoveryadoptees.com.
[permanent dead link]
Retrieved 21 February 2023.
63. ^ Statistics Norway, Adoptions ,
153. ^ Pearl, Lynne (May 2000). "Why wasn't I told? Making sense of the late
64. ^ Statistics Norway, Births
discovery of adoption" (PDF). The Benevolent Society. Retrieved
65. ^ Embassy of Sweden (Seoul), Adoptions to Sweden Archived 12 21 February 2023.
October 2008 at the Wayback Machine, 12 February 2002
154. ^ Wegar, Katarina (2000). "Adoption, Family Ideology, and Social Stigma:
66. ^ Statistics Sweden Births Archived 31 October 2008 at the Wayback Bias in Community Attitudes, Adoption Research, and Practice". Family
Machine, 2002 Relations. 49 (4): 363–370. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3729.2000.00363.x .
67. ^ a b The National Adoption Information Clearinghouse of the U.S. JSTOR 585831 .
Department of Health and Human Services, How Many Children Were 155. ^ March, K. (1995). "Perception of Adoption as Social Stigma: Motivation for
Adopted in 2007 and 2008? Archived 12 April 2019 at the Wayback Search and Reunion". Journal of Marriage and the Family. 57 (3): 653–660.
Machine, September 2011 doi:10.2307/353920 . JSTOR 353920 . p. 654.
68. ^ "National Vital Statistics System – Birth Data" . Centers for Disease 156. ^ National Adoption Attitudes Survey, June 2002, Evan Donaldson Institute,
Control. 9 January 2019. Retrieved 16 January 2019. page 20 and 38."
69. ^ Openness in Adoption: Building Relationships Between Adoptive and Birth 157. ^ National Adoption Attitudes Survey, June 2002, Evan Donaldson Institute,
Families Archived 27 July 2020 at the Wayback Machine, Child page 47"
Welfare Information Gateway, January 2013, Retrieved 1 January 2019 158. ^ 3 Generations of Adoption, 12 April 2007
70. ^ "Postadoption Contact Agreements Between Birth and Adoptive 159. ^ Maya's Mom, 7 April 2007 Archived 3 May 2008 at the Wayback
Families" . U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration Machine
for Children and Families, Administration on Children, Youth and Families,
160. ^ The Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute, 9 April 2007 press release
Children's Bureau. 2005. Archived from the original on 13 May 2008.
Archived 3 May 2008 at the Wayback Machine
Retrieved 10 May 2008. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires
161. ^ National Adoption Attitudes Survey, June 2002, Evan Donaldson Institute,
|journal= (help)
page 20."
71. ^ "Postadoption Contact Agreements Between Birth and Adoptive Families:
162. ^ "Policy and Practice: Many Faces of Adoption" . Archived from the
Summary of State Laws" (PDF). U.S. Department of Health and Human
original on 19 February 2006. Retrieved 12 March 2006. The Evan B.
Services, Administration for Children and Families, Administration on
Donaldson Adoption Institute
Children, Youth and Families, Children's Bureau. 2009. Archived (PDF)
163. ^ http://pewfostercare.org/docs/index.php?DocID=41 Archived 17
from the original on 9 October 2022. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal
December 2005 at the Wayback Machine The Pew Commission of Children
requires |journal= (help)
in Foster Care
72. ^ See, e.g., Seymore, Malinda L. (March 2015). "Openness in International
164. ^ Abdollahzadeh, Hasan; Chaloui, Ommolbanin; Mahmoudi, Hiva
Adoption". Texas A&M Law Scholarship.
(November 2019). "The Development and Standardization of Psychometric
73. ^ Ellen Herman, Adoption History Project, University of Oregon, Topic:
Criteria of Attitude toward Adoption Questionnaire (ATAQ) and its Relation to
Confidentiality Archived 3 April 2009 at the Wayback Machine
Prosocial Behavior and Character Strengths" – via ResearchGate.
74. ^ Bethany Christian Services Archived 7 April 2007 at the Wayback
165. ^ Abdollahzadeh,H., Chaloui.O., Mahmoudi,H.(2019). The Development and
Machine
Standardization of Psychometric Criteria of Attitude toward Adoption
75. ^ SECA Organization Archived 10 February 2009 at archive.today
Questionnaire (ATAQ) and its Relation to Prosocial Behavior and Character
76. ^ National Council For Adoption, Adoption Factbook, 2000, Table 11 Strengths, International Journal of Applied Behavioral Sciences
77. ^ Berry, Marianne; Barth, Richard P.; Needell, Barbara (1996). "Preparation, (IJABS),6(1),1–12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22037/ijabs.v6i1.26379
support, and satisfaction of adoptive families in agency and independent 166. ^ Adoption History Project (University of Oregon),Topic History in Brief
adoptions". Child & Adolescent Social Work Journal. 13 (2): 157–183.
167. ^ a b Book Review: The Primal Wound by Nancy N. Verrier
doi:10.1007/BF01876644 . S2CID 144559063 .
168. ^ Miles, 2003: Does Adoption Affect the Adolescent Eriksonian Task of
78. ^ Mosher, William D.; Bachrach, Christine A. (January–February 1996).
Identity Formation? Available: http://www.cs.brown.edu/~jadrian/docs/paper
"Understanding U.S. Fertility: Continuity and Change in the National Survey
s/old/20030212%20Miles%20-%20Adoptive%20Identity.pdf Archived
of Family Growth, 1988–1995" . Family Planning Perspectives.
16 February 2008 at the Wayback Machine Retrieved: 30 January 2008
Guttmacher Institute. 28 (1). Archived from the original on 24 October
169. ^ "ADOPTING -Why adoptive parents support open records for adult
2008.
adoptees" . Archived from the original on 19 February 2006. Retrieved
79. ^ "Adoption Experiences of Women and Men and Demand for Children to
12 March 2006. Why Adoptive Parents Support Open Records for Adult
Adopt by Women 18–44 Years of Age in the United States, 2002" (PDF).
Adoptees
Vital Health Stat. U.S. Center for Disease Control. 23 (27): 19. August 2008.
170. ^ Adoption History Project (University of Oregon), Topic Illegtimacy
Archived (PDF) from the original on 1 December 2023.
171. ^ Martin Gottlieb, The Foundling, 2001, pg. 105–106
80. ^ "Adoption Experiences of Women and Men and Demand for Children to
172. ^ Origins USA position papers Available: "OriginsUSA – Position Papers" .
Adopt by Women 18–44 Years of Age in the United States, 2002" (PDF).
Archived from the original on 12 September 2007. Retrieved 2 May 2008.
Vital Health Stat. U.S. Center for Disease Control. 23 (27): 8. August 2008.
Accessed: 27 April 2008.
Archived (PDF) from the original on 1 December 2023.
173. ^ Access to Adoption Records , Child Welfare Information Gateway,
81. ^ a b c US Child Welfare Information Gateway: "How Many Children Were
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
Adopted in 2000 and 2001?"
Administration for Children and Families, Children's Bureau, 2020, p. 5
82. ^ "AFCARS Report #1 – Current Estimates as of January 1999" .
174. ^ Samuels, Elizabeth (2001), "The Strange History of Adult Adoptee Access
Children's Bureau. Administration for Children and Families. Archived from
to Original Birth Records" , Adoption Quarterly, vol. 5, pp. 64–65
the original on 26 September 2006. Retrieved 18 July 2006.
175. ^ Adoption History Project Topic Confidentiality
83. ^ Nemtsova, Anna. "Who Will Adopt the Orphans?" . Russia Now. The
176. ^ ISRR – International Soundex Reunion Registry Reunion
Washington Post. Archived from the original on 26 March 2023. [permanent dead link]
Registry
84. ^ Crary, David (3 April 2010). "Adopted Chinese orphans often have special
177. ^ R. Rushbrooke, The proportion of adoptees who have received their birth
needs" . The Boston Globe. Archived from the original on 5 March 2016.
records in England and Wales, Population Trends (104), Summer 2001, pp
85. ^ "33: Convention of 29 May 1993 on Protection of Children and Co-
26–34."
operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption" . HCCH. Archived from
178. ^ TRIADOPTION Archives TRIADOPTION Archives Archived 30 April
the original on 29 August 2023. Retrieved 5 February 2024.
2011 at the Wayback Machine
86. ^ The International Law on the Rights of the Child (book), Geraldine Van
179. ^ Gass-Poore, Jordan. "Most American adoptees can't access their birth
Bueren, 1998, p.95, ISBN 90-411-1091-7, web: Books-Google-81MC .
certificates. That could soon change" . Mother Jones. Retrieved 29 April
87. ^ The best interests of the child: the least detrimental alternative (book),
2022.
Joseph Goldstein, 1996, p.16, web: Books-Google-HkC .
180. ^ USA Today, As adoptees seek roots, states unsealing records , 13
88. ^ Somebody Else's Child
February 2008."
89. ^ a b U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Child Welfare
181. ^ Today is Truly Historic , 15 January 2020, retrieved 25 September 2020
Information Gateway, Adoption Disruption and Dissolution Archived 3
182. ^ Governor Cuomo Announces New Law Allowing Adoptees to Obtain a
January 2009 at the Wayback Machine, December 2004
Certified Birth Certificate at Age 18 Goes into Effect January 15 , 13
90. ^ Case, A.; Lin, I. F.; McLanahan, S. (2000). "How Hungry is the Selfish
January 2020, archived from the original on 17 October 2020, retrieved
Gene?" (PDF). The Economic Journal. 110 (466): 781–804.
25 September 2020
doi:10.1111/1468-0297.00565 . S2CID 11707574 .
183. ^ Signed and Unsealed, New York Delivers on Its Promise for Open Birth
91. ^ L. Raynor, The Adopted Child Comes of Age, 1980
Records , 4 March 2020, archived from the original on 12 September
92. ^ Hamilton, Laura. "Adoptive Parents, Adoptive Parents: Evaluating the
2020, retrieved 25 September 2020
Importance of Biological Ties for Parental Investment" (PDF). American
184. ^ Inquirer, Eric Bedner / Journal. "Birth certificate bill championed by
Sociological Review. Archived from the original (PDF) on 21 February
Cassano becomes law" . Journal Inquirer. Retrieved 29 April 2022.
2007. Retrieved 3 June 2007.
185. ^ "Adoptees nationwide may soon gain access to their original birth
93. ^ Gibson, K. (2009). "Differential parental investment in families with both
certificates" . The Conversation. 22 November 2021. Retrieved 29 April
adopted and genetic children". Evolution and Human Behavior. 30 (3): 184–
2022.
189. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.01.001 .
186. ^ Schechter and Bertocci, "The Meaning of the Search" in Brodzinsky and
94. ^ Kaye, K (1982). The Mental and Social Life of Babies . Univ. Chicago
Schechter, Psychology of Adoption," 1990, p. 67
Press. pp. 261 . ISBN 978-0226428482.
187. ^ R. Rushbrooke, The proportion of adoptees who have received their birth
95. ^ A. Adesman and C. Adamec, Parenting Your Adopted Child, 2004
records in England and Wales, Population Trends (104), UK Office for
96. ^ Michaels, Ruth, and Florence Rondell. The Adoption Family Book I: You
National Statistics, Summer 2001, pages 26–34
and Your Child. Page 4.
188. ^ a b March, K. (1995). "Perception of Adoption as Social Stigma: Motivation
97. ^ "Adoptionfilm.org | Messages from the Production Team" . Archived from
for Search and Reunion". Journal of Marriage and the Family. 57 (3): 653–
the original on 31 December 2005. Retrieved 12 March 2006. Adoption:
660. doi:10.2307/353920 . JSTOR 353920 .
An American Revolution
189. ^ http://digitalcommons.mcmaster.ca/dissertations/AAINN60675/
98. ^ http://www.familyhelper.net/ad/adteach.html Robin Hillborn, Teacher's
Archived 10 December 2010 at the Wayback Machine K. March, "The
Guide to Adoption, 2005
stranger who bore me: Adoptee-birth mother interactions," Dissertation,
99. ^ Grade School: Understanding Child Development and the Impact of
McMaster University, 1990
Adoption http://adoption.com/wiki/Grade_School:_Understanding_Child_Dev
190. ^ Schechter and Bertocci, "The Meaning of the Search" in Brodzinsky and
elopment_and_the_Impact_of_Adoption Archived 6 November 2014 at
Schechter, Psychology of Adoption," 1990, p. 70
the Wayback Machine
191. ^ R. Sullivan and E. Lathrop, "Openness in adoption: retrospective lessons
100. ^ Gauthier, L.; Stollak, G.; Messe, L.; Arnoff, J. (1996). "Recall of childhood
and prospective choices," Children and Youth Services Review Vol. 26 Issue
neglect and physical abuse as differential predictors of current psychological
4, April 2004.
functioning". Child Abuse and Neglect. 20 (7): 549–559. doi:10.1016/0145-
192. ^ "Searching for missing relatives in Poland ". Financial Times. 30 October
2134(96)00043-9 . PMID 8832112 .
2009.
101. ^ Malinosky-Rummell, R.; Hansen, D.J. (1993). "Long term consequences of
193. ^ Gitta Sereny, "Stolen Children" , rpt. in Jewish Virtual Library (American-
childhood physical abuse" . Psychological Bulletin. 114 (1): 68–69.
Israeli Cooperative Enterprise). Accessed 15 September 2008.
doi:10.1037/0033-2909.114.1.68 . PMID 8346329 .
194. ^ "Sorry Day and the Stolen Generations" . Australian Government.
102. ^ Lyons-Ruth K. & Jacobvitz, D. (1999) Attachment disorganization:
Archived from the original on 12 May 2012. Retrieved 16 June 2012.
unresolved loss, relational violence and lapses in behavioral and attentional
195. ^ "The Adoption History Project" . Department of History, University of
strategies. In J. Cassidy & P. Shaver (Eds.) Handbook of Attachment. (pp.
Oregon. Retrieved 16 June 2012.
520–554). NY: Guilford Press
196. ^ "First Nations in Canada" . Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development
103. ^ Solomon, J. & George, C. (Eds.) (1999). Attachment Disorganization. NY:
Canada. 7 June 2011. Retrieved 16 June 2012.
Guilford Press
197. ^ Mintzer, Richard (2003). Yes, You Can Adopt!: A Comprehensive Guide to
104. ^ Main, M. & Hesse, E. (1990) Parents' Unresolved Traumatic Experiences
Adoption . Carroll & Graf. ISBN 9780786710355. Retrieved 12 December
are related to infant disorganized attachment status. In M.T. Greenberg, D.
2011.
Ciccehetti, & E.M. Cummings (Eds), Attachment in the Preschool Years:
198. ^ Bernardo, Sanford M. (31 December 2012). "Internet Adoption Scams and
Theory, Research, and Intervention (pp161-184). Chicago: University of
the Russian Adoption Ban" . Adoptimist. Retrieved 3 June 2013.
Chicago Press
199. ^ National Indian Child Welfare Association: the Indian Child Welfare Act of
105. ^ Carlson, V., Cicchetti, D., Barnett, D., & Braunwald, K. (1995). Finding
1978 (ICWA) Archived 14 May 2013 at the Wayback Machine
order in disorganization: Lessons from research on maltreated infants'
200. ^ Abuelas de Plaza de Mayo Archived 7 February 2006 at the Wayback
attachments to their caregivers. In D. Cicchetti & V. Carlson (Eds), Child
Machine's website (in English)
Maltreatment: Theory and research on the causes and consequences of
child abuse and neglect (pp. 135–157). NY: Cambridge University Press. 201. ^ Spanish doctor stands trial over Franco-era 'stolen babies'

106. ^ Cicchetti, D., Cummings, E.M., Greenberg, M.T., & Marvin, R.S. (1990). An 202. ^ Spain's stolen babies and the families who lived a lie
organizational perspective on attachment beyond infancy. In M. Greenberg, 203. ^ "U.S. missionaries charged with kidnapping in Haiti - CNN.com" .5
D. Cicchetti, & M. Cummings (Eds), Attachment in the Preschool Years (pp. February 2010.
3–50). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 204. ^ Haitian orphans rushed to new homes abroad , CNN, 17 January 2010.
107. ^ Carlson, E.A. (1988). "A prospective longitudinal study of 205. ^ a b US sends 4,000 more troops to Haiti , The Guardian, 21 January
disorganized/disoriented attachment" . Child Development. 69 (4): 1107– 2010.
1128. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1998.tb06163.x . PMID 9768489 . 206. ^ Schapiro, Rich (21 January 2010). "Haiti earthquake: Groups urge
108. ^ Lyons-Ruth, K. (1996). "Attachment relationships among children with adoption freeze, believing kids' kin may be alive" . Daily News. New York.
aggressive behavior problems: The role of disorganized early attachment Archived from the original on 24 January 2010. Retrieved 22 January
patterns". Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 64 (1): 64–73. 2010.
CiteSeerX 10.1.1.463.4585 . doi:10.1037/0022-006x.64.1.64 . 207. ^ Birthparent Legacy Term Archived 19 December 2010 at the
PMID 8907085 . Wayback Machine TRIADOPTION® Archives
109. ^ Lyons-Ruth, K.; Alpern, L.; Repacholi, B. (1993). "Disorganized infant 208. ^ Birth Parents The Adoption History Project
attachment classification and maternal psychosocial problems as predictors 209. ^ Adoption Terminology Child Welfare League of American 1980s
of hostile-aggressive behavior in the preschool classroom". Child 210. ^ Adoption Language Archived 26 April 2011 at the Wayback Machine
Development. 64 (2): 572–585. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1993.tb02929.x . by Brenda Romanchik
PMID 8477635 . 211. ^ Speaking Positively: Using Respectful Adoption Language Archived
110. ^ "Developmental Issues For Young Children in Foster Care". Pediatrics. 24 June 2008 at the Wayback Machine, by Patricia Irwin Johnston
106 (5): 1145–50. November 2000. doi:10.1542/peds.106.5.1145 . 212. ^ Logan, J. (1996). "Birth Mothers and Their Mental Health: Uncharted
PMID 11061791 . S2CID 74279466 . Territory". British Journal of Social Work. 26 (5): 609–625.
111. ^ 'I sent my adopted son back into care' BBC doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.bjsw.a011137 .
112. ^ a b Plomin, R.; Fulker, D.W.; Corley, R.; DeFries, J.C. (1997). "Nature, 213. ^ Wells, S. (1993). "What do Birthmothers Want?". Adoption & Fostering. 17
nurture, and cognitive development from 1–16 years: A parent-offspring (4): 22–26. doi:10.1177/030857599301700405 . S2CID 147064719 .
adoption study". Psychological Science. 8 (6): 442–447. doi:10.1111/j.1467- 214. ^ "Why Birthmother Means Breeder," Archived 6 July 2008 at the
9280.1997.tb00458.x . S2CID 145627094 . Wayback Machine by Diane Turski
113. ^ a b AJ Stunkard, An adoption study of human obesity, The New England 215. ^ Cultural Sensitivity and Political Correctness: The Linguistic Problem of
Journal of Medicine Volume 314:193–198, 23 January 1986 Naming, Edna Andrews, American Speech, Vol. 71, No. 4 (Winter, 1996),
114. ^ a b Vogler, G.P., Influences of genes and shared family environment on pp.389–404.
adult body mass index assessed in an adoption study by a comprehensive 216. ^ PAL 1992 Archived 12 January 2011 at the Wayback Machine
path model, International journal of obesity , 1995, vol. 19, no1, pp. 40–45 OURS 1992
115. ^ a b Thomas O'Conner, Are Associations Between Parental Divorce and 217. ^ Holt 1997 Holt International 1997
Children's Adjustment Genetically Mediated?, American Psychological 218. ^ Sayyid Muhammad Rivzi, "Adoption in Islam," [1] , 9 April 2010,
Association 2000, Vol. 36 No.4 429–437 219. ^ Tim Lister and Mary Rogers, "Egypt says adoptive moms were human
116. ^ a b Amy L. Paine, Oliver Perra, Rebecca Anthony, and Katherine H. smugglers," CNN , 23 March 2009,
Shelton (August 2021). "Charting the trajectories of adopted children's 220. ^ Jennifer S. Jones, "Is Adoption from Egypt Possible?," [2] ,
emotional and behavioral problems: The impact of early adversity and
221. ^ Smit, Eileen M. (1 December 2002). "Adopted Children: Core Issues and
postadoptive parental warmth" . Development and Psychopathology. 33 Unique Challenges". Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Nursing.
(3): 922–936. doi:10.1017/S0954579420000231 . PMID 32366341 .
15 (4): 143–150. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6171.2002.tb00389.x . ISSN 1744-
Archived from the original on 19 November 2023. Retrieved 19 November
6171 . PMID 12562132 .
2023.

Barbara Melosh, the American Way of Adoption page 10

Further reading [ edit ]

Argent, Hedi. Related by Adoption: a handbook for grandparents and other relatives (2014)
Askeland, Lori. Children and Youth in Adoption, Orphanages, and Foster Care: A Historical Handbook and Guide (2005) excerpt and text search
Carp, E. Wayne, ed. Adoption in America: Historical Perspectives (2002)
Carp, E. Wayne. Family Matters: Secrecy and Disclosure in the History of Adoption (2000)
Carp, E. Wayne. Jean Paton and the Struggle to Reform American Adoption (University of Michigan Press; 2014) 422 pages; Scholarly biography of
an activist (1908–2002) who led the struggle for open adoption records
Conn, Peter. Adoption: A Brief Social and Cultural History (2013) excerpt and text search
Eskin, Michael. The Wisdom of Parenthood: An Essay (New York: Upper West Side Philosophers, Inc. 2013)
Fessler, Ann. The Girls Who Went Away: The Hidden History of Women Who Surrendered Children for Adoption in the Decades Before Roe v. Wade
(2007) excerpt and text search
Gailey, Christine Ward. Blue-Ribbon Babies and Labors of Love: Race, Class, and Gender in U.S. Adoption Practice (University of Texas Press; 185
pages; 2010). Uses interviews with 131 adoptive parents in a study of how adopters' attitudes uphold, accommodate, or subvert prevailing ideologies
of kinship in the United States.
Melosh, Barbara. Strangers and Kin: the American Way of Adoption (2002) excerpt and text search
Minchella, Tina Danielle. Adoption in post-Soviet Russia: Nationalism and the re-invention of the "Russian family" (2011)
Pertman, A. (2000). Adoption Nation: How the Adoption Revolution Is Transforming America. New York: Basic Books.
Seligmann, Linda J. Broken Links, Enduring Ties: American Adoption Across Race, Class, and Nation (Stanford University Press; 2013) 336 pages);
comparative ethnographic study of transnational and interracial adoption.
Fictive Kinship: Making Maladaptation Palatable Archived 4 March 2016 at the Wayback Machine

· · Women's health [show]

· · Adoption and foster care [show]

· · Family [show]

· · Parenting [show]

· · Sexual and reproductive health [show]

Authority control databases [show]

Categories: Adoption Family law Adoption, fostering, orphan care and displacement

This page was last edited on 13 February 2024, at 08:33 (UTC).

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 4.0; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit
organization.

Privacy policy About Wikipedia Disclaimers Contact Wikipedia Code of Conduct Developers Statistics Cookie statement Mobile view