New Worlds of Adoption:
Growing Up in Complex Families
Harold D. Grotevant, Ph.D.
Rudd Family Foundation Chair in
Psychology
University of Massachusetts
Amherst USA
Department of Psychology
Thanks to SRHD for the Invitation!
Adoption Touches Many Lives
 More than 5 million adopted persons in
U.S.
 1.5 million children currently live in
adoptive families
 Over 1.6 million women have taken
concrete steps toward adoption at some
point
 As many as 60% of Americans have a
direct personal to adoption
Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Inst, U.S. Census 2000
Adoption as a Diverse Family Form
Varies by adopting parent(s)
• single or two-parent
• same-sex or straight
• same or different race from
child
• same or different nationality
from child
• both parents unrelated to child
vs. one related (stepparent)
Varies by characteristics
of the adopted child
 placed as infant or at older
age
 placed in good health or
with special needs
 adopted alone or with
siblings
Varies by intermediary
 private adoption agency
 public child welfare
system
 independent adoption
Varies by circumstances
leading to adoption
 birth parents wanted a better life
for the child than they could
provide
 not emotionally ready to parent
 unwilling to parent following rape
or incest
 child removed by courts (abuse,
neglect, chemical dependency)
4 Distinct Worlds of Adoption in U.S.
 Adoption of children from child
welfare system (~51,000 / yr)
 International adoptions (~17,200 / yr)
 Infant adoptions – children
voluntarily placed by birthparents
(~14,000 / yr)
 Kinship adoptions, incl. by
stepparents (~53,000 / yr)
[data from U.S. DHHS / CWIG ; Dept of Homeland Security - orphan visas]
Each "world" differs in terms of
 Characteristics of adopters motivations, demographics
 The children - physical & mental
health, histories, risks
 Population dynamics & trends
 Family & community challenges
 Laws and policies that pertain
Expanding Conceptualizations of Adoption
Currently in USA...
Adoption is a legal process:
Parenting rights and
responsibilities are legally
transferred from birth to adoptive
parent(s).
Child is “subtracted” from one
nuclear family and “added” to
another.
Toward a New Conceptualization...
Instead, adoption creates a
new “adoptive kinship
network” that permanently
links the families of birth and
of rearing together, through
the child, who is shared by
both.
Movement toward Openness in
Adoption
 Started in private adoption agency
placements in late 1970s - early 1980s
 Contributing dynamics:
• Fewer babies to place, yet high
demand
• Evolving view that contact may be in
the best interests of the child
Typical features of open adoption
in domestic infant placements
 Birth parent(s) chooses the
adoptive family
 Direct contact between birth
family and adoptive family
members
Nevertheless,
adoptive
parents are the
legal parents
and have all
legal parenting
rights and
responsibilities.
 Contact may include meetings,
phone calls, exchange of pictures,
gifts, letters, e-mails, Skype, etc.
 Contact may involve different people
 Frequency varies widely
 Agreements may be verbal or written
What Have We Learned??
Collaborative Team
Hal Grotevant, UMass Amherst
Ruth McRoy, U of TX, Boston College
Gretchen Wrobel, Bethel Univ
Martha Rueter, Univ of Minnesota
Susan Ayers-Lopez, U of TX
Lynn Von Korff, U of Minn
Many talented graduate and
undergrad students and volunteers
Sincere Thanks to our
Funding Partners
 National Institute of Child Health
and Human Development
 National Science Foundation
 William T. Grant Foundation
 Rudd Family Foundation Chair
Overarching Research Questions
 Are there links between openness (structure
and process) and psychosocial outcomes for
adopted persons, adoptive parents, & birth
parents?
 How are relationships managed within
adoptive kinship networks? (e.g., emotional
distance regulation)
Participants: Wave 1 (1987-92)
190 adoptive families:
 parents mostly white, middle to upper middle
class; mean age 40 yrs; adopted because of
infertility
 children: ages 4 – 12 (M=7.8 yrs); infant
placements; no transracial, international, or
special needs placements
169 birthmothers:
 mostly white, ages 14-36 at placement (M=19.3
yrs); voluntary placements – wanted a better
future for her child
Participants: Wave 2 (1996-2000)
approx 8 years after Wave 1
 At least one member in 177 of 190
original families – seen in their homes
across the U.S.
 173 adoptive mothers & 163 adoptive
fathers
 156 adolescents (M=15.6 yrs)
 127 birthmothers
Participants: Wave 3 (2005-2008)
approx 9 years after Wave 2
 169 young adult adoptees
(ages 21-30; M=25.0 yrs)
 103 close relationship partners
 151 adoptive mothers
 134 adoptive fathers
Methodological Approach
 Multiple respondents
• adopted child, both adoptive parents, agency staff,
birth mother (W1&2), relationship partner (W3)
 Multiple types of measures
• extensive personal interviews, standardized
questionnaires, family interaction task (W2), school
records (elem school into college)
 Quantitative and qualitative
 Use of technology
• web-administered measures & online interactive
interview (chat) at W3 for young adults
Child / Adolescent / Young Adult Outcomes
 Adoption Adjustment
--adoptive identity, curiosity,
information seeking
 Family Dynamics in Kinship Network
--emotional distance regulation
 Mental health
--internalizing, externalizing, adaptive
functioning, school performance
 Close relationships outside the family
--relationships with peers, intimacy
Identity involves integration of
different elements
Things that are chosen:
 career path
 values
 religious & political commitments
 views of self-in-relationships
And things that do not involve choice
– but must be integrated:




gender
race / ethnicity
sexual orientation
being adopted
Adoption Adds Complexity to Identity
Development – there may be...
 lack of information about history,
family, and culture
 need to integrate difficult
information
 need to understand self where
people don’t look like you
 BUT adoptive identity is not just
the sum of "facts"
Adoptive Identity - Measurement
 Narrative approach has guided our interest
in both process and structure of identity.
 Key variables are coded from lengthy
interviews about adoption with adolescents
and emerging adults.
 Latent Profile Analysis revealed unitary
adoptive identity construct composed of
• Adoptive Identity Exploration
• Internal Consistency
• Flexibility
Linking Parental Facilitation of Birth Family
Contact With Adoptive Identity Development
(Von Korff, 2008)
 Are there age and gender differences?
 How stable is adoptive identity from adolescence
to emerging adulthood?
 Is parental facilitation of contact with birth
relatives associated with adoptive identity during
adolescence?
 Does this effect continue into emerging
adulthood?
Are there age and gender differences?
AT ADOLESCENCE (ages 12 - 20, M = 15.6 yrs)
• age: β = .31, t=4.67
• gender: β = .21 (females), t = 2.71
AT EMERGING ADULTHOOD (ages 21-30, M=25.0 yrs)
• age: β = .02, ns
• gender: β = .09, ns
How stable is adoptive identity from
adolescence to emerging adulthood?
• β = .53, t=7.05
Is parental facilitation of contact with birth
relatives associated with adoptive identity
during adolescence, controlling for age &
gender?
• β = .29, t=3.89
• R2 = .21
Does this effect continue into emerging
adulthood?
• indirect effect through adolescent
identity: β = .15, t=2.99
• R2 = .28
“I think that I am who I am
not just because of my family
who raised me, or because of
the two people that made
me. I think it’s a combination
of all that. Being able to
know all of them has really
helped me to become who I
am.” (female, age 18)
“As soon as I met my
birthfather, I knew who I was.
I don’t know why that had
anything to do with it, but I
was more focused on me. I
didn’t actually feel a part of
the [adoptive] family until I
met my biological parents….I
could become “me” after
meeting someone else.”
Older Literature on "Searching"
 Argued that adoptees searched for birth
relatives because they had poor
relationships with their adoptive parents
or because they were emotionally
troubled
 But many of these studies are from clinic
populations or from groups of adoptees
organized to help each other search.
New Distinctions Emerged from MTARP
 Curiosity
 Information-seeking
 Searching
Wrobel, Grotevant, & McRoy (2004)
Wrobel, Grotevant, Von Korff, McRoy, Ayers-Lopez (2004)
Wrobel, Von Korff, Grotevant (2006)
Wrobel, Grotevant, Von Korff (2008)
Skinner-Drawz, Wrobel, Grotevant, Von Korff (in press)
Wrobel & Dillon (2009)
Wrobel, Grotevant, Von Korff (2009)
Adoption Curiosity Pathway Model
(Wrobel & Dillon, 2009)
Curiosity
Info
Seeking
Barriers
Searching?
Facilitators
Curiosity What are adolescents most curious about?
1. Why was I placed for adoption?
2. Are my birth parents raising other
children - do I have brothers or sisters I
don't know about?
3. What do my birth parents look like?
4. How are they doing?
What Have We Found?
Information seeking is NOT related to:
 adolescents' attachment to their
adoptive parents
 adolescent adjustment
Information seeking IS related to:
 positive expectations of relationship with
birth parents
 higher levels of adoptive mothers'
communicative openness about adoption
 lower levels of independence-granting by
adoptive mothers (i.e., more maternal
control)
 lower levels of perceived barriers
 higher levels of perceived facilitators
Note: some of the barriers and facilitators are
policies about access to information.
Evidence-based guidance for professional
practice and for families:
 Curiosity is normal part of development
 Information seeking is about identity and
not necessarily about developing a
relationship with birth relatives
 Parental control stimulates information
seeking
 Barriers & facilitators influence
information seeking
Family Dynamics in Adoptive Kinship
Networks
 Fear of Reclaiming
 Emotional Distance Regulation Management of Relationships
 What Does it Take to Make Contact Work?
 Special Considerations in Adoptions from
Child Welfare System and International
Adoptions
Comfort Zone of Interaction
 Individuals have "range of tolerance for
separation and connection - a comfort
zone" (Farley)
 When forming the adoptive kinship
network, differences must be contended
with in a dynamic process involving
connection and separation over time
 Adoption often pulls adults out of their
comfort zones
 Ideal situation - mutually agreeable fit
 Reality - like all families
--Grotevant (2009)
“We used to write daily and call each other
weekly, I mean in the beginning. When the
children were real little, it was tremendous
intensity. And I think as our birthmother
became more secure in herself and went on
to finish college, her need to have to see
them once a week or once a month became
less and less. And you know, she feels more
comfortable with us, we feel more
comfortable with her, and we just know that
we always have access... You just take it one
day at a time. If you want it to work,
you’ll work at it. We feel it’s healthy and
want it to work because of our children.”
(adoptive mother)
Emotional Distance Regulation Begins
Prior to Placement
Participants bring
• Developmental histories
• Expectations about relationships &
adoption
• Relationship skills
"Typical" Changes over the
Life Course of the AKN
 Contrasting desires for contact by APs and
BPs at the beginning, and diverging
changes over time
 Increasing role of the child in contact
decisions
 Birthmother’s "watchful anticipation" of
18th birthday
 … but "teenage things take over"
Non-normative Changes Require
Continued Distance Regulation:
"Life Happens"
 Entrances and exits of AKN members
• Adoption and birth of additional
children
• Adoptive parent divorces and deaths
• Birthmother marriages and births
 Geographical moves
Mis-steps in the Dance Provide
Opportunities for Growth
 Paradoxical relationship
 Boundary violations
 Inappropriate familiarity
What does it take to make contact work?
 Shift in thinking from nuclear family
to adoptive kinship network
 Valuing of child’s dual connection to
birth and adoptive parents
 Flexibility in day-to-day logistics
 Excellent communication skills
 Commitment to the relationship – in
the best interest of the child
Contact Involves Special Challenges When the
Child Had Been Removed from the Family
 Questions about regulating the contact:
who? when? where?
 Protecting the child against recurrence of
trauma
 Developing empathic understanding of birth
parents’ situation
 Consideration of extended family and sibling
contact
Contact Issues in International
Adoptions
• Cultural issues (stigma, shame)
• Cultural understandings about
permanence
• Language barriers
• Economic disparities
Conclusions
 Adoption is changing to meet the
needs of children and families.
 Because the concept of family is
culturally and historically bound,
adoption will continue to change and
adapt.
 However, we know much about the
developmental needs of children – and
we need to make sure that new forms
of adoption meet those fundamental
needs.
It’s All About the Kids ...
Thank you for your
interest!
Contact:
Harold Grotevant
hgroteva@psych.umass.edu
Department of Psychology