Adoption occurs in all societies. Yet the form of the adoption process differs according to a society's structural constraints and the expressed needs of that society's members. For example, traditional societies usually arrange informal adoptions in which children are placed with other kin (Benet, 1976; McDade, 1991). In such cases, regular interaction between kin members ensures adopted children's knowledge of their birth parents' identity and continued birth family contact. In contrast, most Western societies use formal legal procedures to arrange the adoption of third-party, non-kin family members (Griffith, 1991). The first adoption laws implemented in North America included a secrecy clause sealing adopted children's original birth records and restricting the release of their biological background information (Benet, 1976; Garber, 1985). These secrecy clauses are now being challenged (Griffith, 1991). For example, many racial and ethnic groups in North America use the informal adoption practices of their traditional cultures, thereby avoiding the legal demands of Western adoption agents (Das Gupta, 1995, p. 161). In addition, the recent increase in private adoptions has led to more open communication and, often, face-to-face contact between adoptive and birth parents (Berry, 1991). More and more open adoptions, where the adoptive parents have information about the birth parent and vice versa, are also being arranged (Caplan, 1990). The relative success of these alternate practices brings into question the validity of an adoptive process that denies adoptees access to their biological heritage (Sachdev, 1989). The strongest challenge against secrecy comes from the actions of adult adoptees who have searched for, and established contact with, unknown birth parents (Gonyo & Watson, 1988; March, 1995; Pacheco & Eme, 1993; Sachdev, 1992). Before reunion with the birth parent, these adoptees claim a sense of incompletion from their inability to fully integrate their biological background information into their identity structure (Anderson, 1989; Haimes & Timms, 1985; Simpson, Timm, & McCubbin, 1981; Sobol & Cardiff, 1983; Triseliotis, 1973). After reunion, they experience a sense of personal coherence and serenity from the background knowledge gained through meeting the birth parent (Pacheco & Eme, 1993; Sachdev, 1992). These findings have produced a strong debate over the continued need for secrecy in adoption (Garber, 1985; Griffith, 1991; Sachdev, 1989). An interesting element in this debate is the lack of similarity among searching adoptees. To date, no specific sociological category or personality type has been found to help determine which adoptees are most likely to search or which are most likely to engage in contact with birth mothers (Haimes & Timms, 1985, p. 51; Sachdev, 1992, p. 58). Searchers represent all age cohorts, socioeconomic status positions, educational levels, and degrees of satisfaction with the adoption outcome (Pacheco & Eme, 1993; Simpson et al., 1981; Sobol & Cardiff, 1983). In addition, adoptees who possess a considerable amount of background material about their birth parent may be just as likely to search as adoptees who possess little or no knowledge (Anderson, 1989; Haimes & Timms, 1985; Sorosky, Baran, & Pannor, 1974, 1975, 1978). Adoption appears to be the only factor to consolidate these individuals into any distinct, unified group (Pacheco & Eme, 1993, p. 58). The identification of adoption as the only common link among searchers suggests a greater focus on the social position of adoptee than the research literature currently exhibits. With this focus in mind, this article examines an adopted population's view of the impact of secrecy on their adoptive experience. That view emerges through a study of (a) the way in which 60 reunited adult adoptees perceived others' acceptance of them as adoptive family members, (b) how that perception affected their desire for contact with their birth mother, and (c) how reunion affected their sense of social acceptability. …