Confidential Adoptions Research Articles

Openness in International Adoption

The growth in international adoption has been spurred, at least in part, by the desire of adoptive parents to return to closed, confidential adoption where the identity of the birth mother is secret and there is no ongoing contact with her. After a long history of secrecy in domestic adoption in the United States, there is a robust trend toward openness. That is not the case with international adoption, which are typically closed transactions. There is, however, a growing interest in increased openness in international adoption. International adoptive families who were once happy to avoid birth parent involvement are now seeking them out, because of health concerns or because their child is interested in learning about their birth parents. Some adoptive families are concerned about issues of corruption, coercion, and trafficking in the birth country and want contact with birth parents to assuage those concerns. International adoptive families are learning about positive outcomes of domestic open adoptions, and hope to replicate those results in the international context. International adoptees are reaching adulthood and are increasingly interested in searching for birth families, despite the many practical difficulties in doing so. International human rights, and in particular the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-Operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption, guarantee rights of identity and information that requires increased openness in international adoption. In addition, best interests of the child standards in international law points to a need for the same kinds of open adoption arrangements that have been studied in the West and have been determined to benefit children. Further, openness in international adoption is a practical solution to fraud, corruption and trafficking in international adoption by using the “sunlight as disinfectant” method. Countries involved in international adoption need to do more to take adoptees’ identity rights seriously.

International approaches to Origin Countries and Birth Parents

International approaches to Origin Countries and Birth Parents By Júlia Vich-Bertran Introduction Adoption literature often refers to the adoption triad, comprised of the adoptive parents, the adoptees, and the biological parents, the latter being the silenced part of the triad. When biological parents are considered, the studies focus on the psycho-sociological profile of the mothers who decide or are obligated to relinquish their children to another family, the factors that motivate their choices, and the impact of relinquishment through their life span. Generally, the women portrayed in these studies are unmarried adolescents living in developed countries. More recently, psychological research has focused on the outcomes of “open adoption” for these members of the triad. However, biological fathers are usually left out of the adoption literature, becoming “figures in the shadow,” as Mason has pointed out (29). Perhaps the most forgotten figures of the adoptive triad are biological birth families of international adoptive programs. Because current academic research has been dominated by the outcome studies of developmental psychology, these studies inquire into the adaptation, acculturation, and mental health of adoptees after their adoption, while completely ignoring the pre-adoptive part of the adoptive trajectory. Thus the actors, practices, and values that establish the patterns of circulation of minors in the “sending” countries—before the child has been matched with his/her adoptive family—are obliterated. The international adoptive path easily dispels the political, social, and historical circumstances that frame the “abandonment” of certain minors and breaks away all connections with biological families. This can distort the adoption research. In this respect, academic delving into international adoption mirrors the desire of adoptive parents to give adoptees a “clean break” in their new homeland, erasing all footprints in their birth country. As few adoptive parents or researchers inquire into the actual motives for and practices of relinquishing children in the “sending” countries, Western discourses on the adoption triad are inevitably biased towards the Vich-Bertran, “International” 219 interests and values of the adoptive parents, which they tacitly assume to be universal. Even though anthropology has been the pioneer discipline in illuminating the origin contexts of biological families, there are still a lot of shadows and empty spaces to fill, reflecting mostly our own prejudices and fears. For this reason, I decided to include in this bibliography a variety of fields and disciplines, which have tackled issues related to the circulation of minors in their countries of origin and the role of national and international birth families, this disregarded third of the adoption triad that is systematically excluded from the hegemonic discourse. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona Abreu, D. No Bico da Cegonha: Histórias de adoção e da adoção internacional no Brasil. Rio de Janeiro: Relume Dumará, 2002. Print. Bachrach, C. A., K. S. Stolley, and K. A. London. “Relinquishment of Premarital Births: Evidence from National Survey Data.” Family Planning Perspectives 24.1 (1992): 27–32. Bailey, J. M. “Making the Adoption Decision: A Study of Birthmothers” Diss. The Union Institute, 1997. Print. Baumann, C. “Adoptive Fathers and Birthfathers: A Study of Attitudes.” Child and Adolescent SocialWork Journal 18.5 (1999): 373–91. Print. Beck, M. “Toward a National Putative Father Registry Database.” Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy 25.3 (2002): 1031. Print. Blanton, T. L., and J. Deschner. “Biological Mother’s Grief: The Postadoptive Experience in Open Versus Confidential Adoption.” Child Welfare 69.6 (1990): 525–35. Print. Boss, P. Ambiguous Loss: Learning to Live with Unresolved Grief. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1999. Print. ---. Once a Mother: Relinquishment and Adoption from the Perspective of Unmarried Mothers in South India. Nijmegen: Radboud UP, 2008. Print. Bouchier, P., L. Lambert, and J. Triseliotis. Parting with a Child for Adoption: The Mothers Literature Perspective. London: British Association for Adoption and Fostering, 1991. Print. Adoption & Culture Vol. 4 (2014) 220 Bowie, F. “Adoption and the Circulation of Children.” Cross-Cultural Approaches to Adoption. Ed. Bowie. London: Routledge, 2004. 3–20. Print. ---. Cross-Cultural Approaches to Adoption. Oxford: Routledge, 2004. Print. Brodzinsky, A. “Surrendering an Infant for Adoption: The Birthmother Experience.” The Psychology of Adoption. Ed. D. Brodzinsky and M. Schechter. New York: Oxford UP, 1990. Print. Carr, M...

Evolution and resolution: Birthmothers' experience of grief and loss at different levels of adoption openness

This article explores birthmothers' experiences of grief and loss over time across the continuum of openness in adoption. Data were collected by structured interview at two points in time: 4—12 years postplacement (169 birthmothers) and 12—20 years postplacement (127 birthmothers). At Wave 1 a majority of the birthmothers were experiencing moderate to high degrees of grief. However, by Wave 2 a similar majority reported feeling some or no feelings of grief. Birthmothers in fully disclosed adoptions tended to have lower levels of grief than those in confidential adoptions at Wave 2. Overall, the results suggest that the “right amount” of openness for a birthmother may change over the life course. Implications for practice are discussed.

Open Adoption as a Family Form

In this article, community assessments of support for three levels of open adoption are examined, including two types of mediated adoption, fully disclosed adoption, and confidential adoption. Combining telephone survey data from a Canada-wide random sample of 706 respondents with 82 qualitative interviews, the authors report on community assessments of these levels of openness and the relevance of these results for other survey research conducted on these issues. The authors also explore community assessments of the perceived advantages and disadvantages of open adoption and confidential adoption for adoptive parents, birthparents, and adopted children and how these may or may not reflect clinical assessments. Finally, the authors consider the implications of these results for clinical initiatives with members of the adoption triangle.

Changes in Birth Father Involvement in Stepfamily Adoption in the Republic of Ireland

The majority of domestic adoption applications in the Republic of Ireland today concern the adoption of children into their stepfamilies. These adoptions are processed under the Adoption Act 1952 and the adoption severs connections with the child's non-custodial birth parent, usually the birth father. Birth fathers had no legal entitlement to inclusion in any decision about the proposed adoption of their children until the Adoption Act 1998. This Act allows for the legal notification/consultation of a birth father where his child is placed for adoption. It does not grant him the right to consent or object to the adoption. This study by Celia Loftus relates to the impact of legal change on the practice of involving birth fathers in the stepfamily adoption decisions relating to their children. It formed part of the documentary research and analysis of 269 confidential Adoption Board files on stepfamily adoptions during the years 1985, 1992 and 1999. The findings of the study are related to changing behaviour and expectations in fatherhood as evidenced in other research.

What children know about their birth circumstances in stepfamily adoption in the Republic of Ireland

The majority of adoptions of children born in the Republic of Ireland nowadays relate to children in stepfamilies. The children involved in these adoptions are the children of the natural mother and they have no blood relationship to the mother's husband. They are children of a previous non-marriage relationship as children of marriage or divorce are not eligible for stepfamily adoption. The child is adopted into the stepfamily to allow her/him equal legal status to other children of the marriage. Some children in adopting stepfamilies have no/inadequate information about their origins, despite world recognition of a child's right to knowledge of their identity and birth parents. This paper outlines the numbers of children in this situation, and the growing openness over time to allowing children such information. It explores the relevance of social work intervention in such cases. The research was carried out in 2002, on 269 confidential Adoption Board files, for a Masters thesis in social work.

The Impact of Openness on Adoption Agency Practices

ABSTRACT This article reports the results of a longitudinal study of the changing openness-related practices of private U.S. adoption agencies. Staff from private adoption agencies were interviewed at three points in time, in 1987–89, 1993, and 1999, about their current practices and attitudes regarding openness in adoption and any changes that may have taken place since the previous interview. From 1993 to 1999 agencies continued a trend toward offering and encouraging more open adoptions. During this period fully disclosed arrangements became more common and had the greatest growth since 1987, while confidential adoptions continued to decrease in frequency. Mediated adoptions remain the predominant arrangements. Changes in the adoption options offered by the agencies at all three time periods have been driven primarily by the demands of the birthmother for greater openness. However, by final data collection in 1999, most agencies in this sample changed from viewing the birthmother as their primary client to viewing the adopted child as their primary client. Implications for agency practices are discussed.

Why Are So Many U.S. Families Adopting Internationally?

This paper uses social exchange theory to explain the increase by which U.S. families are adopting internationally, compared to domestically. Benefits of adopting internationally appear associated with a preference for infants, confidential adoptions, race/ethnic similarity and shorter waits. Costs are related to generally higher expenses and a greater likelihood of developmental and other health risks among the children. While international adoptions can be expected to increase on this basis, trends may be slowed as a result of social context factors (for example, recent policies governing international adoptions) and greater awareness of inequity in power relations within the adoptive family triad. Implications for practice related to policy advocacy are discussed.

Legal Parenthood and Continued Parent-Child Relationships—The Moral and Experiential Aspects of Parenting

ABSTRACT This paper presents a construct of parenting which provides criteria for differential solutions in cases of child protection, i.e., confidential adoption, adoption with contact and out-of-home placements. It is proposed that the moral aspect of parenting be central in judicial proceedings regarding the protection of the child. In addition a distinction between the moral and the experiential aspect of parenting should be made. The presentation of this construct is based on the author's assessments of parents when acting as an expert witness to the court (in Israel), in three cases in which compulsory adoption was petitioned by the state. The assessment of the moral aspect of parenting is based on the parent's own evaluation of his/her own parenthood, and the assessment of the experiential aspect is based on the parent-child relationships with a particular emphasis -on the child's responses to the parent. This construct may allow experts to tread the fine line between assessing parents and accusing them and provides a base for negotiation between parents' conceptions of their parenthood and the court's.

Adoption, Identity, and Kinship: The Debate Over Sealed Birth Records

Adoption, Identity, and Kinship: The Debate Over Sealed Birth Records. Katarina Wegar. New Haven: Yale University Press. 1997. 169 pp. ISBN 0-300-06759-3. $22.50 cloth. In this book, Katarina Wegar, sociologist, attempts to make explicit the implicit assumptions that have shaped adoption and the debate over sealed records. She argues that adoption policies have been shaped by central assumption of differences, by patriarchal assumptions about the nature of motherhood, and by social workers' attempts to gain authority and professional influence. She also examines the role of search activists in polarizing the debate over sealed records through their emphasis on the biological basis of feelings of kinship and their characterization of the need to search as a genetic and universal biological imperative. Wegar thus makes significant contribution to the debate over sealed records by focusing her analysis on the social context within which the search debate takes place. Wegar observes that the belief that adopted children are different from and somehow inferior to children raised by their biological parents enters the debate through the research assumptions of adoption and policymakers and the self-narratives of search activists and proponents of adoption reform. Wegar makes clear her own experience as an adult adoptee who has identified her birth parents and maintains ongoing contact with her birth mother. She presents, however, balanced and thoughtful analysis of the perspectives that inform the debate over the release of confidential adoption information. To do so, Wegar employs the frame-critical perspective, theoretical approach she uses to examine how adoption itself and members of the adoption triangle are socially and culturally constructed by adoption and search activists as different from the norm. Wegar begins her analysis by reviewing the historical development of adoption as social institution and examines the social conditions giving rise to the search movement. She also discusses legal challenges to the policy of sealed records and the role of this policy in perpetuating social inequality. She then examines the research assumption of experts who emphasize psychopathology in adoption, and she considers the role of the professionalization of social work in the development of American adoption practice. Wegar uses this review to challenge research that pathologizes adoptive families and adoptees and that ignores the impact of stigmatizing social and cultural beliefs about infertility, adoption, and kinship. …

Grief Resolution of Birthmothers in Confidential, Time-Limited Mediated, Ongoing Mediated, and Fully Disclosed Adoptions

This study examines grief resolution issues for 75 birthmothers who placed infants for adoption four to twelve years ago in confidential, time-limited mediated, ongoing mediated, or fully disclosed adoptions. Interview data from sets of birthmothers and adoptive families were analyzed. Birthmothers in each of the four adoption arrangements exhibited the continuum of grief resolution, from “very poor” to nearly “very good” resolution. However, birthmothers in fully disclosed adoptions had significantly better grief resolution than those with confidential and time-limited mediated adoptions, and those in ongoing mediated had better grief resolution than those with time-limited mediated adoptions. Implications of these findings for pre-placement planning as well as pre- and post-adoption services are discussed.

Adoptive Couples: Communication and Changes Made in Openness Levels

The communication facility component of the Clinical Rating Scale (CRS), based on the Circumplex Model of Marital and Family Systems (Olson, 1993), was employed to compare a group of adoptive couples that had increased their level of adoption openness from mediated to fully disclosed with a group that remained in mediated arrangements. Couples with increased levels of openness demonstrated significantly higher levels of self-disclosure, listener's skills, empathy, continuity/tracking, respect and regard, and global communication facility than couples in the mediated group. Groups did not differ significantly in speaker's skills. Case studies illustrative of these findings and implications for professionals working with adoptive families are provided. COMMUNICATION AND CHANGES MADE IN OPENNESS LEVELS* Until the 1970s, adoption in the United States was shrouded by secrecy and stigma. Members of the adoption triad (adoptive parents, adopted children, and birthparents) were protected from each other in the belief that all benefited from confidentiality. Birthmothers permitted their parental rights to be terminated, transferring those rights to adoption agencies, who then placed the children with adoptive parents. Adoptive parents and birthparents never met, and children were usually not given the opportunity to meet their birthparents (Chapman, Dorner, Silber, & Winterberg, 1986). The secrecy so paramount in this procedure centered around the stigma that the culture had placed upon it: birthparents had children out of wedlock, adopted children were labeled as illegitimate, and adoptive parents were infertile (Feigelman & Silverman, 1986; McRoy, Grotevant, & White, 1988; Reitz & Watson, 1992). In response to general dissatisfaction with this traditional arrangement, the past two decades have seen notable changes in the confidentiality once commonplace in agency-facilitated adoptions (Chapman et al., 1986; Chapman, Dorner, Silber, & Winterberg, 1987; Feigelman & Silverman, 1986). Adoption practices now lie on a continuum of openness, allowing for different levels of communication between adoptive families and birthparents. In confidential adoptions, no communication exists between the adoptive family and the birthparents. In fully disclosed, or open adoptions, the adoptive family and birthparents maintain direct, ongoing communication. In mediated adoptions, communication is relayed through a third party without the exchange of identifying information (Grotevant, McRoy, Elde, & Fravel, 1994). Many adoptive families move along this continuum through their life cycle, making significant changes in openness levels. For example, an adoption that began as confidential or mediated may evolve into direct correspondence and full disclosure with birthparents. Conversely, some adoptions move the opposite direction on the continuum, decreasing in openness from initially higher levels (Grotevant et al., 1994). This study examines marital communication processes within families that are actively opening up their adoptions. This is an important area to study because changes made in adoption openness are potentially stressful to the family system. Openness changes are often in response to one or more members' dissatisfaction with the current openness level. For example, a child adopted in a confidential arrangement could become unhappy with the lack of information regarding his or her background. Researchers have noted this feeling to be especially likely during a child's adolescent years (Feigelman & Silverman, 1986; McRoy, Grotevant, Ayers-Lopez, & Furuta, 1990, McRoy et al., 1988) because the primary developmental task of this period entails the establishment of a coherent identity and sense of self (Feigelman & Silverman, 1986; Galvin & Brommel, 1986; McRoy et al., 1990; McRoy et al., 1988; Morrison & Zetlin, 1988). Not possessing basic genealogical and background information (e. …

Adoptive Family System Dynamics: Variations by Level of Openness in the Adoption

This study examines the consequences of variations in levels of openness in adoption, especially focusing on the dynamics of the adoptive family system from the perspective of the adoptive parents. Participants included the father, mother, and at least one adopted child in 190 adoptive families, and 169 birthmothers, drawn from adoption agencies across the United States. Families included 62 confidential, 17 time-limited mediated, 52 ongoing mediated, and 59 fully disclosed adoptions. When compared to parents in confidential adoptions, those in open adoptions generally demonstrated higher levels of acknowledgment of the adoption, empathy toward the birthparents and their child, a stronger sense of permanence in the relationship with their child as projected into the future, and less fear that the birthmother might try to reclaim her child. Despite these mean differences, variations within all levels of openness were present, and results are discussed in terms of the ongoing process involved in building a family through adoption.

Adoption in the Bondage of the Oedipal Myth

This article examines the effect of the Oedipal myth on the axiomatic link between adoption and confidentiality. Rank's interpretation, which centers on the choice between knowing and living, is presented as an explanation for the dominance of the generally accepted policy of confidential adoption. It is proposed that confidentiality, which entails concealing the child's whereabouts from the biological parents, suggests that “Laius might kill Oedipus,” thereby attributing evil intentions to the biological parents even in cases where it is their inability, not their evil intent, that leads to the adoption of the child. It is proposed that this portrayal of biological parents might impede adoption and could be avoided if the general policy of adoption were not bound by confidentiality.

Some theoretical considerations on confidential adoption part IV: Countertransference

Psychological self-awareness is as essential to the maturation of one's professional self as is the development of theoretical and clinical expertise in child placement. This paper represents a first published attempt at examining countertransference in adoption. The focus is within the context of confidential adoptions, which the authors believe is more child-focused and intrapsychically based than the current experimentation with open adoptions. A distinction is made between countertransference and non-countertransference issues. Countertransference responses are divided into Racker's three categories: the concordant; the complementary; and the disjunctive. Clinical data illustrates these responses in actual practice from the perspective of confidential adoptions.

Some theoretical considerations on confidential adoptions part III: The adopted child

In all cases of newborn adoption where placement is made directly into the permanent adoptive home, the adoptive parents become the psychological parents for that child. While adopted children do have separate psychological and genetic parents, the capacity for intimacy, identity, and a cohesive sense of self develops through the consistent empathic attachment between the adoptive parents and the child. We discuss the adopted child's psychological development through infancy, pre-oedipal, oedipal, latency, and adolescence and focus on the child's intrapsychic tasks at each developmental phase. We note how development is different for the adopted child and how this development would be diminished or enhanced by the direct or subtle indirect involvement in an open or confidential adoption. Open adoptions appear to have the risk of serious interference at each developmental phase. Confidential adoptions appear to provide the child with the psychological protection for the unfolding of development. There is a new trend in the field of child welfare toward “openness in adoption,” which purports to change traditional confidential adoptions. We discuss the crucial aspects of the intrapsychic difference for an adopted child experiencing an open or confidential adoption.

Some theoretical considerations on confidential adoptions, part I: The birth mother

In all cases of newborn adoption where placement is made directly into the permanent adoptive home, the adoptive parents become the psychological parents for that child. While birth parents give the gift of birth, they do not experience the developmental process of being a parent because in reality they are emotionally unprepared for this responsibility. We discuss the clinical meaning of a voluntary termination of parental rights, the appropriate grieving of the real narcissistic loss of the baby, and the meaning of adoption for a birth parent.There is a new trend in the field of child welfare toward “openness in adoption” which purports to change traditional confidential adoptions. We discuss the crucial aspects of the intrapsychic difference for a birth parent experiencing an open or confidential adoption.

Some theoretical considerations on contifential adoptions, part II: The adoptive parent

In all cases of newborn adoption where placement is made directly into the permanent adoptive home, the adoptive parents become the psychological parents for that child. While adoptive parents enter the development phase of parenthood, the task is complicated by the fact that the child they are about to raise is not their biological child. We discuss the biological and psychological foundations of parenthood and examine the tasks that adoptive parents face when confronted with either an open or confidential adoption. We focus on the ways in which either procedure may assist or disrupt the adoptive parents' ability to form and maintain an on-going healthy attachment to the child.