"We're the Lucky Ones": Transracial and Same-race Adoptive Parents' Responses to Adoption-related Bias

• In Event: Poster Session 07
  In Poster Session: PS 07 Topic - Family Context & Processes

Abstract

Adoptive families, especially transracial adoptive (TRA) families (parent and adoptee have different racial/ethnic backgrounds), navigate adoption-related bias while supporting their children’s identities. This mixed-methods study uses frameworks of adoption bias (intrusive/insensitive comments reflecting adoption-related judgments; Baden, 2016), adoption and ethnic-racial socialization (Pinderhughes, 2013), and preparation-for-bias (PfB) actions (parents offer strategies to help children deal with future bias incidents; Hughes et al., 2007) to examine: (1) how adoptive parents perceive others’ adoption-related comments and questions; (2) how parents engage their children when responding to these experiences; (3) differences between TRA and same-race adoptive (SRA) parents in these processes.

104 adoptive parents across 26 states were primarily White (90.4%) and mothers (95.2%). 77 families were TRA (74%); 27 (26%) were SRA. Adoptees’ mean age was 10.45 years. Through an online survey, parents reported on experiencing specific adoption-related situations, their thoughts of the experience, and their messages to their children. Researchers coded parents’ PfB perceptions, actions, and roles (educator, protector, or empowerer; see Table 1 for definitions and examples) regarding adoption biases from parents’ messages.

Of six possible adoption-bias themes (“Adoption was meant to be/destiny”, “ Lucky”, “Search for birth parents”, “Poor/drug-addicted birth parents”, “Wrong country”, “Unwelcome curiosity”; Baden, 2016), families experienced M=2.18 themes. Here, we summarize Lucky (someone saying the child was lucky to be adopted) and Wrong country (someone guessing the wrong birth country for the child) findings. Cross-theme patterns of the six themes were examined as well.

Figure 1 presents data on families’ experiences of themes. Lucky was experienced by the most families; Wrong country was experienced second least. Most parents thought Lucky messages were offensive and noted that parents were the lucky ones, not adoptees. 73.2% of parents took PfB actions: 64% took an empowering role whereas 27% carried out an educator role. More SRA families were unsure of how to view Lucky messages, whereas more TRA families took actions to prepare the child and took a role (educator or empowerer).

Regarding Wrong country, most parents thought that others had innocent interest (40%) or made an honest mistake (60%). 56% took PfB actions: parents mostly conveyed an educator (36%) or empowering (16%) role. SRA and TRA group comparisons were not possible, given SRA sample limitations.

Notable cross-theme patterns were apparent (See Table 1). Whereas parents were more likely to see some themes as intrusive and offensive, parents were likely to see other themes as reflecting an honest mistake or innocent interest. Across all six themes, the most common action parents took was preparation for bias. Across four adoption bias themes, the most common PfB action was to educate the child about the adoption bias themes, irrespective of whether parents saw others as intrusive/offensive or innocent and naïvely interested. Interestingly, very few parents took the protector role for their child.

This study increases our understanding of how adoptive families navigate micro-aggressions. Implications and future directions will be discussed.

Authors

• Jenna Olivia Zeltzer Kupa, Tufts University
  Presenting Author

• Seungmi Lee, Tufts University
  Non-Presenting Author

• Xian Zhang, Tufts University
  Non-Presenting Author

• Anna M. Kimura, University of California - Los Angeles
  Non-Presenting Author

• Jiayi Liu, Michigan State University
  Non-Presenting Author

• Kel Boland, Tufts University
  Non-Presenting Author

• Jessica Matthews, Tufts University
  Non-Presenting Author

• Ellen E. Pinderhughes, Tufts University
  Non-Presenting Author