Blog Post #7: Book Review

Kathy Harrison, author of One Small Boat: The Story of a Little Girl, Lost Then Found, is mother to three biological and three adopted children and has been a foster mother to more than 120 children in the 15+ years she and her husband, Bruce, have served as foster parents in their small Massachusetts community.  In 1996 they were named Massachusetts Foster Parents of the Year and in 2002 they received an award honoring those with a spirit of dedication and commitment to foster parenting and advocacy efforts, the Goldie Rogers Award. Kathy is also a member of the board of the National Foster Parent Association and the Massachusetts State Foster Parent Association.

Harrison’s book depicts a foster family who are passionately involved and committed to helping children who have lost so much in their young lives. The main focus of this book is on one of the little girls whom Harrison almost turned away because she seemed too damaged for her and her family to deal with. Daisy, a six year with a long list of issues ranging from suspected sexual abuse and eating disorder to limited language skills, was an emergency placement for the weekend because her mother did not feel comfortable taking her home after the girl was hospitalized for the second time. Throughout the time she spent in the Harrison home (over a year), she overcame the majority of the problems that had made her life with her mother difficult. She not only learned a lot from her foster family but she taught them about a lot as well.

This story shows the immense strength that is necessary to be a foster parent because not only do they deal with a widespread array of issues among the children they are entrusted to care for but they must also say goodbye to them when they find a more permanent home. Daisy was one of a handful of children who spent a longer period of time in the Harrison household and as a result she bonded with the family; she had parents and siblings and though the adults and older kids knew it was temporary, that cannot prevent bonds from being formed over time. The love and stability the children need and that the Harrison family provides for the children from the foster care system they care for, are not things that everyone is capable of dealing with, nor is it something every family is capable of handling.

After reading this book, I gained a better understanding of the foster care system and though I do recommend that those interested in it read it, there were a few ethical questions that came up. The first was whether it is ethical to remove a child earlier in their life to protect them even though there may be a chance that the parents can figure out their lives and figure out how to be good parents. It is important to keep families together but is it ethical to risk a child’s well-being just for that reason? The other ethical concern I had was related to the placement of children in longer-term but not permanent foster homes. It seems unfair that children who had everything taken from them are placed in a home where they receive love and acceptance and after more bonds are formed, they are yet again, taken away from another family. I feel that this may result in the undoing of whatever progress was made in that child’s life.

Overall, I did greatly enjoy this book and it made me even more interested in finding out more about the foster care system.

-- Lindsey E. --

Blog Post 7 Book Review

The book Culture Keeping  by Dr. Heather Jacobson, a sociology professor at the University of Texas at Arlington, focuses on how adoptive mothers of children from Russia and China incorporate the culture and traditions found in these countries into their family’s lives in the United States.

Transracial adoption has been a recent topic of discussion, especially the ethics involved in white parents adopting children whose race differs from their own. The author spends a significant portion of the book discussing how these adoptive families address the issues of differing race and culture. Recently we had a discussion on whether or not it is truly ethical for white parents to raise a child of a different race and potentially culture. I feel that the examples that the author gives of families who have and continue to work to create a bridge between the two cultures and discuss racial differences with their children, are stand out examples proving that yes, indeed it can be done. Of course the author provides instances of both parents and children, at times, struggling with how to balance it all and make sure that they are doing what they feel is best for their children.  In class we questioned the ethics of this issue, this book, however, proves that it can be done and that these families and children are thriving in. what outsiders may see as unique, family structures. 

            Another ethical issue that this book brought up was the opinion of the child on culture keeping. The book lead me to consider the point of view of the child who is learning about this culture that is foreign to them, but is part of them as well. The author brings up a story that had been told to her about transracially adopted children who asked their parents to stop forcing their native culture on them because they did not want to be different (Jacobsen, 99). I understand a parent’s motive in wanting them to be comfortable in the fact that they are transracial adoptees, but at the same time I could not help but to wonder if this was ethical. We in some sense the parents violating their children’s right to autonomy, to make their own choices about what they want to learn and how they want to fit in? I know that there are families out there who enjoy integrating the two cultures together, which is great and like the book points out many times beneficial, but is it fair that from essentially day one these kids are being told that they are different and made to embrace and engage in a culture they may want little to do with? These are just some of the new ideas and perspectives this book has lead me to consider. 

--Mary S

Blog Post #7- Book Report

Miró’s work, Daughter of the Ganges, tells the story of an girl born in Mumbai, who spent the first six years of her life in an orphanage, but was then adopted to a family in Barcelona. The work is a memoir of her return to India as an adult and the emotional journey that that was for her. This book is a valuable resource in the world of adoption ethics because it provides prospective on some largely disregarded issues. One of the interesting facets that this work explores is the idea of a child’s autonomy. In the majority of adoption scenarios we have discussed in class, the child is adopted as an infant, and upholding the best interests standard for the child comes down to the parents’ best judgment on what those best interests are. In this case, not only did the author not have any significant parents or guardians to speak for her, but also she was old enough to speak for herself, and actually personally requested an adoption! The author asked the sisters running her orphanage the parents every day for a year until they submitted. Miró was actually one of the first children in the orphanage to ever be adopted, as this was very out of the norm in Indian culture. If Miró had not said anything, it is inconceivable that she would have been adopted, but given the fact that she wanted it so earnestly, the sisters made an exception and found her a family. This is an extremely interesting concept because the child acted in her own best interests, and the sisters trusted that she knew what was best for herself. Miró’s experience shows that at least in some cases, a child can agree that adoption is the most desirable solution.

Another interesting perspective the author gives is the recommendation that future adoptive parents trying to weed through the international adoption process should relax. She compares the time spent doing paperwork and waiting for its processing to the natural birth process, saying, “[natural parents] make their decision with all the goodwill in the world, and then they have nine months to go through all the worries, to be scared, to [wonder] if they know what they are doing,” (133). The idea that an adoptive parent’s waiting period mirrors the gestation period of a pregnant couple is a pretty interesting concept, and one that I believe used frequently by adoption agencies when working with future adoptive parents. 

Blogpost 6 - The White Privilege

The topic of race can be a sensitive issue. While many racial problems exist within our society, it’s hard to know how to address these concerns. The article Rethinking Racism was eye opening and helped me to gain new perspectives on “silent racism”. It was startling to learn how silent racism is “the racist thoughts, images and assumptions in the minds of white people, including those that by most accounts are ‘not racist’ ” and accounts for the assumptions and perceptions of many individuals (Trepagnier, 1). It’s no surprise that images and messages we receive shape our understanding of the world, but I had not thought of how these thoughts influence our behavior towards race. Even more disturbing, was how many white people do not deem themselves as racist or intentionally discriminate others, yet they are responsible for “maganilization” of other races (Trepagnier, 3). This is important because while many do not intentionally make hateful assumptions or comments, the acceptance to ignore these biases in turn ignores the issue of silent racism altogether. The unconscious racism that whites have towards blacks often transfers into “institutional racism and resulting racial inequality” that has negative implications towards the race (Trepagnier, 4).

I think the hardest aspect of reading these articles was self analysis for personal silent racism towards others. The readings present the idea of increasing awareness of implicit bias and how we should not think of race in an oppositional way, but rather on a “contiumn” that expresses racism in varying degrees (Trepagnier, 5). By thinking this way, it incorporates the unintentional everyday racism that would be often be placed in the “not racist” oppositional category and would “eliminate the false notion” that whites themselves are not racist at all (Trepagnier, 5). I really like this concept of how to think, and it would benefit everyone if we all tried to look at racism this way. More importantly, it would increase awareness of when one has unconscious racism or bias towards a race and allow an individual to gain further understanding to why that may be.

The article also identified that how our definitions and perception of racism is shaped by our culture and socio-economic structure within society. It made me wonder how Minnesota, or even more general, the Midwest states perceives racism and where we fall on the continumn. Equally as relevant, is the idea that the issue of racism that was intertwined in legal segregation around 50 years ago. Because of this, it is not too much of a surprise that people may still have implicit bias towards blacks, especially in the elderly population. Overall, I found it unfortunate but necessary to read how the white privilege is still present in society and how silent racism continues to negatively affect the black population. 

--Gretchen

Blog Post #6: Transracial Adoption

One of my good friends was adopted as an infant from South Korea and in talking with her, I have noticed a few very interesting things. First is that she has no interest in finding out about her biological family. Not that there is anything wrong with that but with everything we've talked about and read in class, I had kind of come to the conclusion that everyone is at least a little bit curious at some point. What I found most interesting was that she doesn't seem to have a connection to or any interest in her Korean heritage at all. There have been instances where she has told me that even though she knows she isn't white there are times she “forgets” and I have been there for a few of those moments. When I first heard this and saw it firsthand, I laughed a little because I was unsure of how to react. Her lack of connection with her past is something that I find to be a little strange because for me, where I come from is a pretty big part of who I am. I take pride in my family and my heritage and learning about it is something I find fascinating. I honestly cannot imagine not knowing anything about my ancestors or where I come from.

I don’t believe that transracial is a bad thing so long as the adoptive parents put in time and effort to educate their child(ren) about their heritage and where they come from. The different encounters I've had with my friend definitely contributed to my opinion of this as did some of the readings for today. I agree that it may be difficult for the adoptive parents to adequately educate their child but I do not think that it is impossible. The lack of change in the NABSW position on transracial adoption from 1972 and currently somewhat surprised me but I understand why they want children of African descent to be raised by parents of African descent. I do believe that parents of a different ethnicity are capable of being great parents and educating their child, so long as they have the resources to do so.

I also found it interesting how developmental issues were discussed in NABSWs view on limiting transracial adoption, “Additional studies have shown that infancy and toddler hood are the two stages where removal from the home and community is most harmful to a child” (NABSW current view). The view that was taken seemed to be that only children of African descent who were removed from their homes in these two stages dealt with more issues with attachment and identity. However, I believe that this would be true for any child no matter what ethnicity. Identity is usually an issue for any child/person no matter what at some point in his/her life. What is being said is in no way false but it is not exclusive to children of African descent, Caucasian children removed from their family at an early age deal with the same issues as well.

-- Lindsey E. --

Blog Post 6 -- Transracial Adoption

I found the topic of transracial adoption to be quite interesting. Most of the people I know that are adopted are not the same race as their parents, and I had not known how controversial a topic transracial adoption is. The readings really surprised me because they seemed to present transracial adoption as being a detriment to the adopted child because their parents would never understand what they go through. Before going through these readings, and taking this class in general, I had only seen adoption as a positive thing, mostly being mostly pros and very few cons. The pros I believe for transracial adoption are essentially the same as the pros for all adoptions. A child who does not currently have a permanent family gets just that as well as the family receiving a child. I understand where the opponents of transracial adoption are coming from in explaining that there are certain cultural aspects that accompany one’s race that a person of a different race may not understand or be able to teach their child. While I feel that this is a valid point, I feel that parents of transracial adoptees more often then not do their best to involve their child’s native culture in their lives. I feel, however, from what we learned in the UN’s declaration on the rights of a Child, that everything should be done with the best interest of the child in mind, which, I think in the majority of cases is what happens. And yes there are some issues that may come up with race and culture, but I feel like all the positives cancel out the negatives. It isn’t perfect but then again what is?

I was surprised by some of the readings as well. I was taken aback by what some of the adoptees were saying about being transracially adopted, especially in the article “Introduction.” The authors call transracial adoption an “isolating experience” (“Introduction, 1). I, being an outsider with regard to transracial adoption, can’t help but to wonder if the authors are to some extent being unfair to other transracial adoptees in saying this. I can’t help but to think to my friends who are transracial adoptees and wonder if this is something that they think, but never talk about? Do they feel as though they have been wronged by being raised by white parents? 

--Mary

Blog Post #6

Whoa. The statement issued by the National Association of Black Social Workers is pretty intense, and highly controversial. At first, I assumed it was a result of a highly discriminatory civil rights era atmosphere. I was shocked to find that virtually the same position was reiterated in recent years. While I don’t deny that there are probably valid concerns for some aspects of transracial adoption, I feel that the NABSW got a little ahead of themselves on these statements.

The first thing that caught me off-guard was the assertion that transracial adoption is “expedient for white folk” and “not…an altruistic humane concern for black children,” (1972 statement). While families probably prefer same-race children, it is bold to suggest that a white person cannot care for the well-being of a black child simply because they are of another race. I’d like to think that people are a little bit better than that.

Another thing that shocked me came from the 1994 statement, which asserted,

 “Transracial adoption of an African American child should only be considered after documented evidence of unsuccessful same race placements has been reviewed and supported by appropriate representatives of the African American community.” This seems illogical. Shouldn’t it be rephrased to say that transracial adoption will be considered if there is documented evidence from the African-American community which shows that there are substantial successful placements within the white community? They are suggesting transracial adoption is only possible when all else fails, rather than being open to the possibility of research showing successful transracial adoption.

I can understand the concern over a black child’s loss of culture, and his/her “removal” from the black community, but to me it seems like the black community, after centuries of persecution and discrimination at the hands of whites, is simply too unwilling to accept seeing their children in white families. It makes sense, and I would surely expect the same reception from the white community if the roles were reversed, but I think its important to remember that we always need to keep the child’s best interests at the center of our discussion. According to the NABSW’s 1994 statistics, over 222,400 black children are in foster care. If there are homes for all of them within the black community, then that’s wonderful. However, if there isn’t, or if placement will take even a few years longer, or if placement would occur in a substantially less stable home, then transracial adoption needs to be considered for the child’s sake. What is worse, a black child losing a direct link to black culture, or a childhood of abuse and neglect spent in perpetual foster care? To me, this argument borders on selfishness.

Adam K. 

Blogpost 5: Option C

            The consequences surrounding open vs. closed adoption are some of the most debated aspects of the adoption process. Whether deciding to remain in contact with birthparents or choosing to cut off all ties has significant impact for all individuals involved, including the adoptive parents, birthparents, and most importantly, the adopted child. After listening and reading a variety of articles, passages, and personal accounts, I am still torn on the idea of favoring one option (closed vs. open) over the other.

            One of the most convincing arguments surrounding openness and adoption is the ability for adoptive children to access medical records. After hearing about Linda's personal account, I think it is the adoptive child’s right to be able to obtain medical records, regardless of future intent with those documents. Other arguments that favor open adoption include the potential relationship that the birthparent(s) and adopted child could develop. Personally, I have witnessed one of my best friends being able to reconnect with her birthparents after she became a legal adult and create a healthy relationship with both birthparents. While I disagree with the idea of “fusing two or more existing families and making them into a larger one” when having an open adoption, I think after becoming a legal adult the adopted child should have the ability to contact and pursue a relationship with birthparent(s) (Allen, 52).

            While open adoption has some advantages, I also agree with the arguments made in favor of closed adoptions. Mary’s personal account earlier in class this week described one of the most convincing statements on why open adoption may not be the correct path. She stated “open adoption is for making the adults feel better and is not in the best interest of the child”. When the birthparent places their child into the adoption pool, they are essentially releasing rights as a parent and ultimate decision maker for their child. Because of this, it would be in the child’s best interest for adoption to be closed in order to reduce the unknown possibility of later emotional stress, confusion, and negotiation that would need to be made between all parties involved. Closed adoption also reflects the parent acting with beneficence and maleficence; again placing the child’s best interest before all other concerns.

            Overall, the strongest argument for open adoption is the ability for adoptive children to obtain their medical records. Likewise, closed adoption helps to prevent potential negotiating and conflict between birthparents, the adoptive family, and adoptive child. The central concern of adoption is to put the child’s best interest first. But what happens when the privacy of the child or privacy of the birthparents comes into question? If an adoptive child wants to outreach to a birthparent, should they have that right? In what situation does another parties rights become more important?

-Gretchen Mach