Adoption Near and Far for American Adoption Workers Victor Groza, Ph. D. Professor of Social Work Mandel School of Applied Social Sciences Bellflower Road Case Western Reserve University Cleveland, Ohio (216) 368 ‑ 6682 Prepared for Adoption Opportunities Meeting, March 10-11, 2003, Washington, DC.

Less you be convinced otherwise  My domestic projects of the last few years: –Sibling Project with Northeast Ohio Adoption Services –Kinship Adoption Project with Bellefaire Jewish Children's Bureau –Minority Adoption Project with Bellefaire JCB –Case Review Project with Cuyahoga County DCFS,

The Reasons We Should Understand Adoption from a Larger Perspective  Globalization vs. Parochialism  Common issues, common struggles—innovation  Increase understanding of kinship, tribal and or community ways of being that are shared by people world wide.  Comparison of models that resemble the early years of child welfare in America.  The perspective from another system helps with a fresh look on the "system" we know so well.  The adoption is final and U.S. citizenship in effect, they are OUR children, same as any child born here  Any adjustment/disruption/search issues (or fall-out) that may arise over the course of a lifetime, will need to be addressed by social workers in the U.S

Why Families Choose International Adoption  The barriers are fewer  The children are younger  Fear –Birth parents –Traumatized children in U. S. system  Racism –Individual –Institutional  Myths –Less damaged –No abuse  The barriers are fewer

Year of Research Study by Country  In-country studies –United States, –Romania, 1999 –India, 2001  Studies of International Adoptions to U. S. –Romanian children, 1994, 1995, 1999 –Indian children, tentative 2005

In country and Out-of-Country Adoptions RomaniaIndia In-country  1998, 71%  1999, 60%  2000, 70%  2001, 57%,  1996, 62%  1998, 56%  2000, 56% International  Before 1990, few  , 10,000 (one of top sending countries)  1998, 840  2000, 1291  2001, 1154  1996, 1000  1998, 1400  2000, 1300

The Child Welfare System Differences  Family vs. Institutional Care  Child-Centered vs. Family-Centered

COMPARISON OF FAMILY FOSTER CARE TO INSTITUTIONAL CARE FAMILY CARE  love  affection  structure  1:1 attention  individual focus  belonging to an extended system of relations  stimulation through relationships INSTITUTIONAL CARE  acceptance/tolerance  distance  routine  1:8-35 attention  group focus  belong/identify to the group  stimulation thru programs

Risks to Children from Early Institutionalization –Health –Development –Attachment –Psychosocial (Social, Emotional and Behavioral) Functioning

Outcomes in International Adoption: A strength or pathology perspective  Resilient Rascals  Wounded Wonders  Challenged Children

Other Comparisons America  Non-voluntary termination of parental rights  Subsidy  Formal and informal systems of post- placement support Romania  Abandonment  No subsidy  Minimal post-placement support India  Abandonment  Savings accounts  Some post-placement support  Only Hindus can adopt in-country; Moslems and Christians have permanent, legal guardianship

Selected Child and Family Demographics

Parent-Child Relations

Adoption Smoothness*

Adoption Impact

Behavior Problems IndiaRomaniaAmerica Somatic Complaints Anxiety/Depression* Social Problems* Withdrawal Thought Problems* Attention Problems* Aggressiveness*

Lessons Learned about Research  Involve parents in study design  Pre-test protocol & instruments  With good preparation, families are willing to accept researchers (and foreigners) in their home to talk about their adoptions.  Involve parents in reviewing results  Deconstruct major trends to look for nuances  Draw from multiple perspective including behavioral genetics, child development, psychology and social work

Lessons Learned about Families  Families were more similar than they were different  Children had more similarities than differences  Families had few service needs that went unmet  The service system issues were different by country  Birth family issues were much more prominent a concern in Romania and India than with American families.  Family environment is powerful in shaping adoption outcomes and mitigating the risk children bring to families, but there is still so much to learn