Scientific research about adoption

 

Please email us if you would would like to read any of the following texts

 

"The transition into adoptive parenthood: Adoption as a process of continued unsafe uncertainty when family scrippts collide" (2016). By Fiona Tasker and Sally Wood. Available at http://ccp.sagepub.com/content/early/2016/03/22/1359104516638911.abstract

Abstract: Our prospective study investigated couples’ expectations of adoptive parenthood and explored how these changed with their actual experience of parenthood. Six heterosexual couples were interviewed just before placement began and 6 months after the children had arrived. Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) was used to analyse both sets of interview data. Expectations of adoptive parenthood mostly transformed smoothly into adoption experience for couples, but challenges were experienced when family scripts collided and a continued feeling of unsafe uncertainty then prevailed within these newly formed family systems. Family script collision seemed a particular problem for couples adopting sibling pairs. To further professional practice in working with families over the transition to adoptive parenting, we suggest that professionals keep in mind a framework that includes the following: Internal and external world influences on family members, Intergenerational issues, Family scripts and the Structural challenges of adoption (IIFS).

 

"Why adoption? Gay, lesbian and heterosexual adoptive parents reproductive experiences and reasons for adoption" (2014). By Sarah Jennings, Laura Mellish, Fiona Tasker, Michael Lamb and Susan Golombok. Available at http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10926755.2014.891549

Abstract: This study aimed to explore the experiences of gay, lesbian, and heterosexual adoptive parents from 130 families. Parents’ reproductive experiences prior to adoption and their reasons for choosing to adopt were compared. Heterosexual couples were more likely to have experienced infertility than same-sex couples. Same-sex couples were more likely to prefer adoption over other routes to parenthood. Parents in all three family types selected their route to parenthood according to normative expectations, attitudes to biogenetic parenthood, ease of access, and moral reasoning. Same-sex couples’ decisions were enabled by the non-discriminatory sociolegal context of the United Kingdom.

 

"Adopters' views on their children's life story books" (2015). By Debbie Watson, Sandra Latter and Rebecca Bellew. Available at http://aaf.sagepub.com/content/39/2/119.short

Abstract: This research, conducted jointly between the UK children’s charity Coram and the University of Bristol, aimed to address the absence in the academic literature of adopters’ perspectives on their children’s life story books. Forty adopters from England and Wales participated in either focus group or telephone interviews. While some of the accounts were of positive experiences, there was a broad consensus that many books were of poor quality, children had been inadequately prepared to explore their histories, adoption professionals and agencies did not seem to prioritise life story books, and that adopters felt poorly prepared in how to use and update them for the benefit of their children. Clear messages for adoption agencies can be elicited regarding the preparation and use of life story books, such as improved training for professionals, monitoring of the quality of books produced and better access to support and guidance for adopters to engage in this crucial work with their children over time.

 

"Contact between birth and adoptive families during the first year post-placement: Perspectives of lesbian, gay and heterosexual parents" (2015). By Rachel Farr and Abbie Goldberg. Available at http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10926755.2014.895466#.VzyCiuRqW9E

Abstract: Despite growing visibility of lesbian- and gay-parent adoption, only one qualitative study has examined birth family contact among adoptive families with lesbian and gay parents (Goldberg, Kinkler, Richardson, & Downing, 2011). We studied adoptive parents’ (34 lesbian, 32 gay, and 37 heterosexual; N = 103 families) perspectives of birth family contact across the first year post-placement. Using questionnaire and interview data, we found few differences in openness dynamics by parental sexual orientation. Most reported some birth mother contact, most had legally finalized their adoption, and few described plans to withhold information from children. We discuss implications for clinical practice, policy, and research.

 

"Contact with birth family in adoptive families headed by lesbian, gay male and heterosexual parents" (2016). By David Brodzinsky and Abbie Goldberg. Available at http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0190740916300135

Abstract: In this study, we examined the extent and type of contact with birth family in adoptive families headed by sexual minority and heterosexual parents prior to or at the time of placement, following placement, and currently. Data were drawn from the Modern Adoptive Families project, a nationwide, non-random survey of adoptive parents' beliefs and experiences that was conducted from 2012 to 2013. The current sample consisted of 671 families headed by heterosexual parents, 111 families headed by lesbian parents, and 98 families headed by gay male parents whose oldest adopted child was less than 18 years old and who was placed domestically either from the public child welfare system or from a private agency or independent adoption facilitator. For child welfare adoptions, sexual minority parents reported higher levels of contact and tended to have more positive relationships with birth family compared to heterosexual parents. Fewer differences by family type were found for private agency adoptions. Higher rates of contact and more positive relationships with birth family were found for private domestic placements compared to those from foster care. Secondary analyses suggest that family demographic and adoption placement differences between sexual minority- and heterosexual-parent families do not account for family type differences in contact with birth family. Policy and practice implications are discussed.