Another researcher that has taken the same view as Simon and Alstein is that of Dales view. He states ‘One of the most fundamental needs of every child is to be provided with a loving family’ (Dale, 1987). Dale (1987) argues that black children are being allowed to remain in institutional care when ‘many of them could be successfully and happily be placed with white adoptive and foster families’ (p. 5).
The main emphasis for these arguments is the emphasis that one of the most fundamental needs of every child is to be provided with a loving family, this is a view that is still echoed today, I discovered this while interviewing adoption social workers for the presentation, (I will review this later on in the report).
Many of the studies conducted in relation to transracial placement are based on the assumptions that the issue of black identity is not of prime importance. This is particularly true of earlier studies which were informed by ideologies of assimilation or integration (Dean 1993). Therefore the main focus was on the black child’s adjustment and integration into the family, and this was used as an indicator of success of transracial placements (Dean, 1993).
Raynor (1970), for example, over a four year period evaluated the ‘success’ of the placements based on a questionnaire designed to assess how well children and families had adjusted to each other. She concluded that; ‘nearly all the children and their adopters are getting on very well indeed, with the children well integrated into these families’ (Raynor, 1970, p 191).
Throughout the literature viewed so far there has been a broad spectrum of opinions and ideas around transracial placements. These arguments have been around integration in transracial placements and the issue of black identity. The emphasis on the need for substitute parents to encourage the child to develop a positive black identity, is one which is echoed by numerous authors, including, Dale, 1987, Kelly et al 1989, and Roxburg 1983 (Dean, 1993).
Dean suggests that Local Authorities can now cater for the needs of the black child, providing that the development of a black identity and maintenance of ties with a black community are considered alongside the other needs of the child (Dean, 1993).
AGAINST
In deference to transracial adoptions, the National Association of Black Social Workers, NABSW 1971 was convinced that the occurrence of transracial adoptions disallowed the children in question to ‘receive a total sense of selves’ (Simon and Roorda, 2002, p7). In other words, children’s abilities to learn about themselves, their racial backgrounds, and their cultures are greatly diminished simply because they are not raised by parents of their same race. As president of the NABSW, in 1971, William T Merrit stated ‘black children should be placed only with black families whether in foster care or adoption’ (Simon and Roorda, 2002). He believed that transracial adoption led to the genocide of the African-American nation. African-American children will grow accustomed to the Caucasian society through their daily experiences within their bi-racial families and will therefore, not grow up embracing there own cultures (Simon and Roorda, 2002).
Criticisms of transracial adoption have not been limited to NABSW. Third world countries from whom Americans and British have adopted many children and racial ethnic groups such as Native Americans (Ryan, 1983; Tizard, 1991) have also voiced concerns about the effects of transracial adoption. Transracial adoption has been referred to as ‘cultural genocide’ and as leading to ‘poor’ identity development and psychological maladjustment (Tizard, 1991).
In 1983, the Association for Black social workers and Allied Professionals here, in Britain, went in front of the House of Commons Select Committee to argue that children of a different race should be placed with parents of their same race (Tizard, 1994, p 89). They argued that transracial adoptions led to identity confusion; children would wish they were Caucasian. Transracial adoptions only fail when society is at its worse; when society becomes racist towards anyone or anything that is different from the assumed norms of society. The NABSW and Allied professionals fear that transracial adoptions are a form of ‘genocide’ because the parents do not take into account their adopted Childs racial background while raising them.
Johnson et al (1987) used the Clark doll test and found that transracially adopted black children had greater awareness of their race (i.e. accurately identified the doll having a race similar to their own) and greater preference toward dolls of their own race at an earlier age than did interracially adopted black children. However, at older ages, both groups of adopted children expressed similar levels of awareness and preference (Johnson et al, 1987). Johnson was concerned with the finding that transracially adopted children’s awareness and preference stayed the same over time, while interracially adopted black children’s preferences and awareness both increased more rapidly and exceeded that of transracially adopted children (Baden, 2001). They concluded from the finding that the transracially adopted children were developing differently from interracially adopted children, and that this developmental difference may be a precursor to problems in the transracial adoptees racial identity. Despite the lack of evidence demonstrating the harmful effects due to the differences, Johnson et al assume that different patterns of development may be harmful.
The opposition to transracial placement is, as with its supporters, equally concerned with the disproportionate number of black people in care (Dean, 1993). With 1 in 5 children in care being black (NCH website) and only 8% of people in Britain being an ethnic minority (Census, 2001) it is certainly a worrying fact. It is argued that this over representation is a direct result of the socially and economically disadvantaged position of black people in Britain, coupled with the ethnocentric bias of social services (Kelly et al, 1989). It is argued by Dean that this leads to decisions being made about the future of black children which are based on dominant white values and which necessarily discriminate against and pathologies black families (Dean, 1993).
It is also suggested that transracial placements pose a threat to the development of a healthy identity in black children (Dean, 1993). Maxine proposes that a child’s identity is shaped by external reinforcements, and that black children receive positive reinforcement when they accept white social values. Maxime states; ‘most black children in this society are reinforced positively when they show signs of adjustment and acceptance to society and its values. This happens even when society is so often hostile and rejecting to black people (quoted in Ahmed et al 1986, p 102).
Those who oppose transracial placements believe that the need for a strong sense of identity, a positive self image is basic to mental health and basic to all children (Dean 1993). Given the importance of positive black images and role models in the development of a healthy black identity, it is argued that transracial placements can never fulfil this fundamental need (Dean, 1993). Arnold et al suggests; ‘black families are best able to provide the care and experience needed for a black child to develop a sense of pride in himself and his origins, to achieve a positive racial identity and a well integrated personality’ (Arnold et al, 1989, p 424).
Another point that the anti transracial placements researchers make is that of social work practice. Brunton and Welch are quoted in Dean’s study stating that ‘the problem lies not in the reluctance of black people to come forward, but in social services reluctance to accept what is being offered (Brunton and Welch, 1983).
It would seem that the arguments against transracial placements are concerned with black identity and the fundamental rights of black people. As Dean suggests; ‘for, accepting that black children have differential needs, and that these are of prime importance, necessarily requires accepting that it is desirable for ethnic minorities to maintain a distinct and separate cultural identity’ (Dean, 1993). If we accept this claim can transracial placements be justified?
RESEARCH CRITICISMS
All research is biased in some way. If we examine how the arguments for have been mainly researched, it is on a much larger scale, the majority of it is interviews around attitudes on transracial placements and is neutral and objective. The anti researchers are subjective, on a smaller scale and politically interpretated. The two sides do agree on some matters. They are both concerned with the disproportionate number of black people in care (Dean, 1993). However, how they go about eradicating the problem differs significantly. When writing up interviews, it is the researcher’s interpretation of events that are implemented into the study (Baxter. 1998). This is something we must consider when researching this topic.
SOCIAL WORK IMPLICATIONS
As a practicing social worker there are certain legal requirements that must be adhered to, even if their own personal view differs from that of the law. With regards to the issue of transracial adoption, the current legislation that is in place is the Adoption Act 1976. The law, however has been subject of a review, culminating in a White paper (Doh, 1993). According to the department of health website; ‘the Adoption and Children’s Act 2002, received Royal Assent on 7th November 2002 and represents the most radical overhaul of adoption law for 26 years. It will replace the outdated Adoption Act 1976 and modernise the whole existing legal framework for domestic and intercountry adoption’ (DOH website, 2003). However, at this moment in time the Adoption Act 1976 is still in place. When considering adoption, social workers must also bring into play the Children’s Act 1989.
With regard to Race and Culture in the Adoption Act 1976 and the Children Act 1989, Ahmed, 1990 states ‘Adoptive parents and children need not be of the same race. This should be contrasted with the positive emphasis in the Children’s Act 1989 on race, culture, religion and language, and with social work practice concerning anti-discriminatory practice and the importance of identity development’ (Ahmad, 1990). The White paper states that the ethnic background of a child should not be the decisive factor but should be considered alongside the ability of adoptive parents to help a child through life (DOH, 2003).
In 1998, a Local Authority Circular, named ‘Adoption – Achieving the right balance’ was produced. In the section ‘Race, Culture, Religion and Language – understanding the needs of children from black and minority ethnic communities’ part 13 it states ‘placement with a family of similar ethnic origin and religion is very often most likely to meet the Childs needs as fully as possible’. (LAC, 1998). This view was repeated when I approached a local social services department. As part of my research into transracial placements, I decided to interview a social worker from the fostering and adoption team in Warrington. They do not have a policy on transracial adoption but follow ‘Government initiatives and BAAF Good Practice guidelines’. The social worker stated ‘we would always same race family find first, if that is unsuccessful we will look for a family of a different race before looking for white adoptive parents’. This seems to be the main view in social work practice today.
However, ‘the government has made it clear that it is unacceptable for a child to be denied loving adoptive parents solely on the grounds that the child and adopters do not share the same racial or cultural background’ (LAC, 1998).
Lena Dominelli in her book ‘Anti-Racist Social Work’ discusses the institutionalised racism that exists in social work. Dominelli suggests that to eliminate institutional racism; ‘I address these complex issues by arguing that fighting racism is white peoples starting point in acknowledging that they have a different relationship to racism from black people, leading to different roles in dismantling it’ (Dominelli, 1988 p 13).
Neil Thompson in his book ‘Anti-discriminatory practice’ states ‘a social work practice which does not take account of oppression and discrimination cannot be seen as good practice’ (Thompson, 2001 p 11). With regard to fostering and adoption Thompson suggests the need to help achieve a positive black identity for the clients in social work practice. He stresses that he does not have the answers to anti-racist social work, however hopes people will make more of a conscious effort to eradicate the problem (Thompson, 2001).
I feel some of the implications that social workers have when practicing are around recruiting black families to adopt. As illustrated with my visit to the local social services department there are simply not enough non white families wanting to adopt. I feel that to meet the needs of the children in the area, the recruitment of these families is most important.
Furthermore, what if the child refuses to go to a same race placement? There may be an underlying issue for the child. They may have rejected their culture/ethnicity due to abuse of some kind. In this case as the Government states ‘the welfare of the child is paramount’ (LAC, 1998), therefore, actually asking the child if possible whether they want a same race placement may be visible as a replacement for presuming.
CONCLUSION
Evidence shows that children suffer more psychologically, emotionally, and physically from prolonged stays in foster care than they do from living in inter-racial environments. Without the existence of transracial adoptions children would be spending years longer in foster care, simply because no-one other than people of the same race, would be allowed to adopt them and give them a stable home.
Of course same race placements are the ideal answer, nevertheless when this is unavailable transracial placements ought to be established. As the social worker that I interviewed believed ‘it is better to have A parent than NO parent’.
No child should be denied the chance at life, the chance to grow psychologically, emotionally and physically, because they are of a different race. From here, anti-transracial adoption groups will continue to gather arguments to downplay the existence of transracial placements. Pro-transracial groups will hopefully continue to find the best homes for children, even if they are inter-racial. This will probably continue because people do not see the human race as a whole, they see individual races, which need to be segregated . Due to this, I believe racism will exist in any given society.
CRITICAL EVALUATION
As part of the groups and my individual learning, we researched the topic of transracial placements. The exact question was ‘Can children achieve a positive identity when placed in a family of a different culture/ethnic origin from their birth family’. My initial thinking concerning this topic was most definitely bewilderment! I was also apprehensive about the other individuals in the group. The reason for this was my own personal confidence. The other members of the group seemed to be extremely confident individuals, not only their persona but academically too. They seemed to have lots of information to provide, even at the initial meeting, I myself was most definitely a novice to the subject. The group then went away and literally researched as much as we could on the topic, we then gathered our information until we met next time. However, we all discovered that it was difficult to find information. The majority of the studies were produced in America, therefore were not as relevant as we would have liked it to be concerning our topic. As a result of this, we decided to break the question up into six different parts and go away and research individually. However, certain members of the group came into difficulty again (me being one of them) therefore we decided to investigate this question another way. We decided to implement a modern day slant on the question to go alongside the research we had already completed. We interviewed two professionals, a lady who fosters black children only and a black man who had been transracially adopted by two white people. The group contemplated that this would hopefully make us stand out from other presentations, as we all know how monotonous and tedious some presentations can be, especially when you’re the last presentation and there has already been a presentation on the same subject as ours! We all agreed this was a high-quality idea. However, four people in the group were interviewing, that left two to do some research and as always in groups some people produced a great deal more work than others. This never really became a problem as it was never discussed, however, I do feel it was evident to other members of the group.
I feel that I have learnt to co-operate with people more liberally, as I am now beginning to realise that every person is dissimilar, they cannot all be as organised as me! I have also gained knowledge of my own personality. I seemed to take on the role as the instigator. I appeared to be the one to keep the group on task. When the conversation wandered onto other subjects I would simply say ‘right come on lets talk about transracial placements again’. I accomplished this by using humour. My confidence also grew as the project went on as discussed earlier at the commencement of the project I was rather nervous about the other members of the group. This stems from past experience in lectures. Most of the group are confident to speak out in lectures, I am not, though this is improving. I believe as a team we have learned to let one person speak at a time. At the start of the project everyone tried to speak at once. We created a rule that only one person speaks at a time, when that one person is speaking everyone must listen and not discuss matters with the person next to them, this became quite successful.
The impact it has had on my thinking about the topic is basically I changed my mind about whether transracial placements do actually work. At first I thought of course it works, why wouldn’t it? However, after researching the topic and discovering the arguments for and against, I have in reality changed my mind. Currently I believe that same race placements should be the first line of enquiry, however if this is not possible the children should then be found other prospective adoptees, this is because research suggests that children are far better off with adoptive parents than in children’s homes.
If I was to repeat this project or something similar in the future I would like people to work in pairs initially (if the size of the groups were substantial enough). I feel this would keep people on task and if individuals are struggling they have another person to turn to for advice before the group meet up again as a whole. I feel the way we approached the subject i.e. using a modern day slant was decent therefore I feel this is something I would attempt to repeat if faced with a presentation again.
WORD COUNT = 3962