Half-price adoptions: Should we tell our kids?

by Anti-Racist Parent columnist Dawn Friedman

When we decided to pursue a domestic adoption nearly five years ago, my husband and I – both of us white – decided that we were open to adopting transracially. We were naïve about this – we really didn’t understand the challenges for children adopted transracially – but when we started researching agencies we made note of their cross-cultural adoption programs.

We are in Columbus, OH and we wanted a local agency. We knew we didn’t want to adopt across state lines because things get iffy when you start mixing up adoption laws. (Every state has its own rules and regulations.) Also we were hoping for an open adoption and I knew it would be unlikely that we could have regular visits between our family and our child’s birth family if airfare became an issue.

We narrowed it down to three agencies in our city. (One other agency had religious requirements we would not meet being an interfaith Jewish/Christian family.) Only one called us back and that’s the agency we chose.

The three agencies we looked at all had separate programs with different costs that were dependent on characteristics of the child – namely children with “special needs” or of African descent cost less to adopt. White kids, kids of mixed race not including black – it’s the full fee to adopt them. Black kids and kids with special needs – about half. *

(I know this isn’t new to most of the people reading Anti-Racist Parent – is’s less expensive to adopt black babies in lots of states. My friend and anti-racist parent colleague, Deesha Philyaw, has done a lot of research about this and I’m sure she’ll share some of her thoughts.)

When we approached the agency we offered to pay the full fee and take whatever baby came our way. The social workers told us that we had to choose a program and that given that we were open to “any race,” we would be placed with a black child because there were fewer waiting parents in that program.

“You may as well get the fee break,” one told us. “Because if you are open to adopting a black baby, you will get a black baby.”

The uncomfortable truth was that the fee break made a difference to our budget. My job was sketchy at that time and having a wholesale adoption would make things easier. So we moved ahead and less than a year later our daughter came home to us.

We have a fully open adoption and regular contact with our daughter’s first mom. Early on we talked about the agency and I told her about the difference in fees; this was something she didn’t know when she began working with them. It’s there on the web site but she contacted them via phone and obviously they didn’t tell her that they would charge parents less for adopting her daughter. Would it have impacted her adoption decision? It sure might have and I think they should be upfront with expectant mothers who contact them.

By the same token, our daughter will know about the fee discrepancies. I have a friend who is also an adoptive mother in a transracial adoption and who also used an agency with a racist fee structure. She says, “My child will NEVER know that our adoption cost less because of his skin color!” Her argument? Knowing will cut to the core of his self-esteem – knowing that he was less valued in the adoption baby market might make him feel that he truly does have less value.

But I can’t lie to my daughter – even by omission – and the racist fee structure is part of her adoption story. I think the key is in how we talk about it and how we respond to her questions, which is not to say that we can make her feel ok about it. Of course we can’t because it’s not ok. She shouldn’t feel ok about it but I also hope we give her the strength and insight not to personalize this institutional racism.

Adoption is rife with –isms. As an adoptive parent, the paradox is recognizing my complicity while still acknowledging my terrific gratitude for having Madison in our lives. There is so much I would have done differently but had I done it differently, Madison wouldn’t be here. I struggle with knowing how to respond now that my feelings about the choices we made have changed. And this includes using an agency with a racist fee structure. But I can’t let my discomfort with my actions keep my kid in the dark about her story. Someday she will know. Someday when we’re going through her box of memories, which includes our adoption paperwork, we will tell her the truth. It is her right. It is her story.

* Our agency moved to a sliding scale after we adopted, basing fees on the income of parents. But they switched back – I’m unsure why. I only know that one social worker told me, “It didn’t work out this way.”

Dawn Friedman is a writer and mother to two children. Her articles have appeared in Salon.com, Yoga Journal, Brain Child and the Greater Good and she is the op-ed editor at Literary Mama. She is also the founder of OpenAdoptionSupport.com and since the adoption of her daughter in 2004 has become passionate about the need for adoption reform. She blogs at this woman’s work.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • del.icio.us
  • Current
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • NewsVine
  • Ping.fm
  • RSS
  • StumbleUpon

Trackbacks & Pings

  1. My antiracist parent post this month | this woman's work on 10 May 2008 at 9:42 am

    [...] about the racist fee structure under which we adopted Madison and how I won’t keep this from her. I wrote it after a friend [...]

  2. demographics « Mother Issues on 20 May 2008 at 5:18 pm

    [...] about trying to get children who will fit my lifestyle. Some of this relates to Dawn’s recent post at Anti-Racist Parent, but I realize that when I talk about race and when I talk about siblings and when I talk about [...]

  3. Madonna and adoption: what’s race got to do with it? on 02 Apr 2009 at 5:02 pm

    [...] one sobering fact: Adopting a black child can cost half the amount of adopting a white child. And although every state has its own rules and regulations regarding [...]

  4. Madonna and adoption: what’s race got to do with it? at Anti-Racist Parent - for parents committed to raising children with an anti-racist outlook on 03 Apr 2009 at 7:15 am

    [...] one sobering fact: Adopting a black child can cost half the amount of adopting a white child. And although every state has its own rules and regulations regarding [...]

  5. a girl like me « Raven’s Eye on 03 Apr 2009 at 8:32 am

    [...] from Here’s one sobering fact: Adopting a black child can cost half the amount of adopting a white child. And although every state has its own rules and regulations regarding [...]

Comments

  1. Jeff wrote:

    Here’s my first thought on how to talk about the fee, though it’s probably quite naive: The fee discount is not based on HER, it’s based on an idea in someone’s head. If people had a time machine and could meet her as an adult then go back to before she was adopted, there’d be no fee discrepancy.

    I can tell I’ve been paying too much attention to politicians because my second thought goes like this, “The adoption agency felt it was so important that you get adopted that they helped pay the fees.”

    I want to say that in this situation I would pay the full fee, even if the rest of the funds count as a donation to the agency. That doesn’t change the fee structure, just what the adoptive parent pays. I guess that would only be a symbolic gesture, and not a very practical one.

    Actually, my first thought after reading this is that I wanted to start working on adopting a child of African descent.

    Thank you for the illuminating article. I hope there are some non-naive comments posted!

  2. Rebecca Budd wrote:

    It’s not racism on the part of the adoption agency; it’s a result of racism in our society. In 2005, when we started the adoption process for our son, we were 1 out of 3 families out of 83 total that would consider an AA boy. There were only 6 families that would consider a AA girls. And that includes bi-racial children. Although “discount” pricing is a sad statement, I am in favor of it if improves the placement rate and quality for children of color. Disclaimer: My husband and I did not receive a “discount” since our annual income was above the threshold.

  3. Jenna wrote:

    The agency through which I placed no longer works with African-American or biracial mothers or white mothers expecting biracial children.

    Yes, you read that right.

    I can’t decide which is more disgusting: charging less for skin color or refusing to work with skin color. They’re both disturbing on a number of levels.

  4. Rita wrote:

    I agree with you about the issue of honesty, but that’s it matters how you tell the story. I adopted my son through foster care, and the fact that it would cost almost nothing was an initial factor in swaying me that way, though it wasn’t the only reason.

    I think it’s important to talk about the realities of adoption with your child, and part of that is money. But does the money reflect the value of the child? Or does it reflect a whole bunch of other factors in society? The truth is that all babies cost money, whether they are adopted or are “homebrewed.” But the cost does not at all reflect their worth.

    There’s a similar issue when it comes to the stipend that foster parents receive. Are they being paid to care for that child? Or is the state providing for that child because they were removed from their birth parents? It all depends on how the matter is discussed. but it DOES need to be discussed. Kids will always know when they are being lied to.

  5. SF Mom wrote:

    Well, I’d like to give you some feedback on that. We adopted our child from foster care, and it didn’t cost us anything because the state paid the associated costs. And that had nothing to do with why we chose to adopt that way, and nothing to do with our daughter’s story. I guess I can’t understand why you would consider the racist half price issue to be part of your daughter’s adoption story. Maybe it’s part of your adoption story, as the parent, but what grown people thought or did to set the rate and accept has nothing to do with her story, in my opinion. And how you see it is going to make a difference in how she sees it. I think we adoptive parents need to be aware that our discomfort or guilt or regrets are part of our own story, not our child’s story. It is wierd and ironic that their racist fee structure helped your family (including your daughter) at a time when you were broke. But I would not put that on my daughter as part of her story. That’s part of your story, I think .

  6. Yoli wrote:

    I got a discount because my children had special needs. It helps when you have kids with medial problems but I honestly think that giving a price break because the child is AA is racist.

  7. Sharon wrote:

    Jenna, how does your agency explain not working with African American families? Or do they refuse to provide a rationale at all? I wonder if their rationale is that they do not like making TRA placements, and they feel they cannot recruit African American adopters. This is the least unpalatable rationale (still unapalatable to me) explanation I can think of!

    My impression is that there is no shortage of individuals willing to adopt healthy infants of any race. If this not true? If it is true, why the reduced rates for African Americ an children? Is the goal to attract more African American adopters, who on average have lower incomes than whites? If that’s the case, why wouldn’t sliding scale fees be effective?

    I just called my agency (which uses a sliding scale fee based on income) after noticing that the fees for DC residents are about half those of MD and VA residents. I thought perhaps the goal was to attract more African American adopters from DC. It turns out that DC has capped the fees that DC residents are allowed to pay at $7,500. The agency rep I spoke to said that she felt more active recruitment recruitment was needed to attract a more diverse pool of prospective adoptive parents (i.e., she implied it wasn’t just a financial issue, which would make sense to me since i know different groups have different feelings about formal adoption – especially when paying hefty fees is involved – vs kin placements that are not necessarily legally formalized.)

  8. Katy wrote:

    “It’s not racism on the part of the adoption agency; it’s a result of racism in our society. ”

    Isn’t this the same thing? Isn’t one perpetuating the other, like a chicken and egg thing? Shouldn’t the agency stop laying that egg?

    As a white woman trying to adopt black children, I really loved the honesty of this post with respect to the learning curve. This process has taught me / is teaching me more about myself, the world around me, and how naieve I was/am, than I ever dreamed possible.

  9. Marcia wrote:

    At first when I read this, I agreed that it was horrible that the fees would be reduced. But then I realized that it is probably a supply and demand issue. I’m not sure if this is a true statement, but are most adoptive parents white? I think that people of any color, in general, would choose to adopt a child that looks most like them. So, if most people that adopted were African Americans, there would be more white babies available and probably less expensive. That is just my thought. However, my husband and I are both caucasian and have adopted outside of our race by choice and couldn’t be happier.

  10. abby wrote:

    I agree that kids always know when they’re being lied to and that never feels good. Good for you for being willing to face the hard conversations. It’s not as if she’s going to grow up thinking this isn’t a racist country and then you’re going to ruin the illusion by breaking the news of her adoption costs to her. The fact that Madison’s adoption cost less because of her race is kind of a big deal and it would be a lie of omission to leave it out. Part of her life story is that she is a minority in a racist world. Sadly, the adoption fee was just the beginning of all of the unfairness.

  11. irshlas wrote:

    I’m sure my comment is going to sound naïve or ignorant, so let me apologize in advance.

    I wish there was an agency in my state than offered reduced fees for adoptions. There is no way in the world we can afford to adopt another child. It’s absolutely out of the financial question. There are many wonderful families who would love to open their homes to a child but they can’t afford to pay the extortionist fees most agencies charge. The fees agencies charge are based on an arbitrary fee schedule that the adoption industry has created. It’s a business and a profit has to be made. If the fees to adopt were actually what an adoption cost (court costs, attorney’s fees, medical exams, etc.), I believe more people would be able to adopt.

    The only “reduced fee” situations I was aware of were for international adoptions of special needs children. As someone who works with individuals with disabilities, I enthusiastically support reduced fees for adoptions of these children. If it allows them the chance to become part of a permanent family, then I think it’s a great idea.

  12. deesha wrote:

    Dawn,

    Thanks for bringing this discussion to the table. As you know, I’m an non-transracial adoptive parent but until I began researching transracial adoption for an article, I had no idea about the fee structure based on race. By raising awareness, I believe more parents can pressure agencies to change their policies. There are race-based alternatives, like sliding scales based on parental income, so there’s no reason besides the profit motive for an agency to have a race-based policy.

    I’m inclined to agree with SF Mom when she makes the distinction between “your” adoption story and Madison’s. I think about my own parallel situation. There are some factors that contributed to my daughter being placed for adoption that we do discuss with her as part of her adoption story, and other parts that I’ll never disclose. My standard is this: If she finds out the truth, would she feel cheated or lied to, or feel as if some part of who she is has been withheld or misrepresented? If not, then it’s not part of her story. The fee structure issue (though this was not part of our experience) would fail this test.

    However, if your “litmus” test differs, I would then say that it is a matter of when you tell her. I would say that 18 or older would be a good time when she’s able to process the fact that this policy was, as another commenter said, about the state of affairs in our society, not about her.

  13. Brooke wrote:

    My husband and I don’t think that the costs involved with adoption are an appropriate issue to discuss with a child or adult adoptee. It really has nothing to do with a child’s adoption story. These are issues/decisions that adoptive parents make for themselves and don’t involve the child. I would never consider discussing our hospital bill with biological child, why would I discuss our adoption fees with my adopted child?

  14. slackermom wrote:

    wow. not sure what side to join here. my experience (and i’ve called/contacted over 100 agencies, faciliators, adoption attorneys, and networkers all over the country) is that the explanation goes something like…

    “we have few/no families waiting to adopt african-american infants, so our agency supplements the fees so that these children can be placed with families”

    now, assuming that’s the truth (i know, big assumption) it does make sense. if an adoption generally costs the agency $20,000, and the agency still wants to work with babies of color, they are indeed supplementing the fees if the adoption of those babies costs less.

    my fingers don’t even feel comfortable typing the price tag next to adoptions, and this particular “fee structure” has always been difficult for me to think through because as you said, i benefited from it.

    my thought is that until NO MONEY is allowed in adoption, it will never be clean. i can’t imagine that some white adoptees feel good upon hearing that their parents had to pay upwards of $30,000 in fees to bring them home. or that some children of international adoptions had parents required to give “gifts” to the government, the orphanage, etc.

    i adopted both of my older children as newborns through private domestic adoptions. my son is biracial and his adoption fees were higher than my daughter’s, who is AA. i don’t see that as part of their story. i see it more as part of my story than theirs, unless they specifically ask. if they do, i will be honest, as we have quite frank discussions about racism in our society.

    but for now, their adoption stories are no more about the fees than they are about the paperwork, the clearances, the physical, the home visits, etc. for now, they are about loss and love and longing and joy and women who cared very deeply about them and still do.

  15. Mogs wrote:

    I agree with Rebecca Budd. If the race-based fees help more kids to find homes more quickly, then they should be used, ugly as they are. Taking care of children is more important than making a statement of principles.

  16. Mirah wrote:

    I totally agree with SF Mom. I don’t think she has to know, unless she specifically asks.

    “I think we adoptive parents need to be aware that our discomfort or guilt or regrets are part of our own story, not our child’s story.”

    That is also true, I believe, of those of us who are mothers who lost our children to adoption. We need to separate what are our issues: our pain, our grief, our remorse etc. and not burden our kids with that and make them feel guilty or responsible for our issues.

    Perhaps you might ask yourself if your goal is to raise an anti-racist child or a child who is proud of you for being so ultra liberal, super PC and anti-racist? Adoptive parents need to be careful lest their child be made to feel – even in the most subtle way – GRATEFUL.

    I would not make any mention of fees at all to an adopted child – that could only serve to make them feel like merchandise! Reduced merchandise, worse still. Not a pleasant feeling. Your thoughts about telling her are to obtain forgiveness from her for your having gone along with it. NOT HER JOB TO FORGIVE YOU – again something mothers who have lost children to adoption are liekwise cautioned againt. They too often wanted to FORGIVEN for not parenting their child. That is reversing roles. Our chidlren owe us no fogrgiveness for the choices we made.

    What you are feeling is reminiscet of lovers who want to “come clean” about an indiscretion to beg forgiveness, Sometimes it is far kinder not to. In many cases it is a relief for the person admitting the lack of judgment, but just immensely hurtful to the one learning about it and then being asked to forgive. Honesty shouldn’t be hurtful.

    .

  17. dawn wrote:

    For the folks that wouldn’t tell: I’ll point out that I’m a writer and have written about this issue including in this blog post, making it a known fact to lots of folks who are NOT my daughter. I would rather she hears it from me than hears it from an essay/blog post/discussion at the dinner table especially because of my interest in adoption reform and our regular discussion about adoption reform.

    To my mind it would be similar to NOT telling a daughter adopted from China about the way China’s one child policy has impacted the availability of girls for international adoption.

    I don’t know when we would tell her because I haven’t met a more grown-up Madison yet (she’s only just turned four!) so I don’t have an age in mind. It will be whenever it seems appropriate to tell her.

    In any case, I’ve become significantly more critical of the adoption industry in the past few years and the racist fee structure is part of my criticism. And my writing and my activism.

  18. rehema wrote:

    This reminds me of the way in which my mom told my youngest sister’s story … one day, it came out that L had been “an accident.” And while my mother intended it in the form of “you were an accident – the luckiest accident that ever happened, and one that we would never change” my sister has always internalized that to a tiny extent as “not really wanted.”

    Here, if the fact that your daughter’s adoption was beneficial to you given your financial state at the time comes out, she may always wonder if, given greater resources, you might have opted for a non-black child. I think this fact is better kept to yourself.

  19. gm wrote:

    Why are AA children not being adopted?

  20. Margie wrote:

    Dawn, thanks for putting this issue out there.

    I can’t see anything but racism reducing adotion fees based on a child’s race or ethnicity. So from my point of view, the dilemma you face regarding Madison’s adoption is a tremendous challenge.

    I’ve been thinking about this in the context of our adoptions. We, too, have all of the paperwork associated with both adoptions in a safe place. As our kids are older, they’ve read through it with us here and in Korea. And they therefore have seen the receipts for the fees and the various services provided for them. In my context, that portion of the paperwork is purely bureaucratic – nothing in it that the kids have been interested in. They are aware that adoption fees were sizable, but neither has ever asked to compare them with other adoption agency’s fees. So I’m not sure how the concerns you raise would even be brought up.

    That said, this is the internet age, and there’s plenty of discussion – right here, for example – on the fact that adoption agencies have charged lower fees for the adoptions of African American children. Perhaps a better way to address this issue in Madison’s case is to wait until she is older and the issue might arise in this context.

  21. deesha wrote:

    Responding to various comments:
    Most of the people adopting black children are black. Single black women, specifically.

    For every White child available for adoption in the U.S., are there at least 200 families waiting two to three times as long as they would if they adopted a Black baby.

    As for the race-based fees encouraging people to adopt, why not lower the fees for all children and place even more. If a black child can be placed for x dollars, then any child can be placed for that same amount. The cost to an agency to place a child should be the same regardless of the child’s race. An adoption worker’s salary/wages are the same, the same paperwork is being processed, the cost for electricity, the water color, and the office supplies are the same. So why should the fees they charge adoptive parents be any different?

    If anything, because black children are harder to place, the fee would theoretically be higher for them because more staff time is spent–again, theoretically–searching for and vetting prospective parents.

    So indeed supply and demand is at work. Agencies know that healthy white infants are in greater demand and lower supply, and therefore, they can charge a “premium.”

    As I said, an income-based, color-blind fee structure will facilitate more adoptions if the idea is to encourage people who might not otherwise be able to afford to adopt. The race-based structure reeks of agencies capitalizing on “market” forces.

    If some agencies can do it without a race-based fee structure, why can’t all of them?

  22. Liana wrote:

    Well explicated, Mirah. I share your assessments and your sentiments.

  23. h sofia wrote:

    I would love to hear from grown adoptees about this, because right now I’m a little conflicted. I think this is an important discussion to have – among adults. I don’t see this as a child’s issue, but as a societal issue.

  24. deesha wrote:

    I started posting stats in response to Marcia’s post but got sidetracked.

    Disclaimer: It is very uncomfortable to write about adoption in these “market” terms, but to the extent that that’s how the system
    works on some level, it’s a necessary evil when exploring what lies behind the race-based fee structures.

    Marcia wrote:

    **I’m not sure if this is a true statement, but are most adoptive parents white? I think that people of any color, in general, would choose to adopt a child that looks most like them. So, if most people that adopted were African Americans, there would be more white babies available and probably less expensive.**

    I don’t follow your reasoning. Unlike an actual marketplace, one groups’ desire to parent (demand) is completely unrelated to the “supply”–which is a completely different groups’ desire to place for adoption, and is certainly unrelated to children who are await adoption after their parents’ parental rights have been terminated.

    In actual market supply and demand, suppliers produce because of the demand they know or perceive is out there. Obviously, this is not what birth parents are doing. When pursuing adoption, prospective adoptive parents are presented with a “supply” of babies. The demand represented by these parents has zero impact on the how this supply breaks down along racial lines.

    In reality, the “supply” and “demand” in the adoption “market” works like this:

    “Demand”:

    Most of the people adopting black children are black. Single, middle-aged black women, specifically.

    For every White child available for adoption in the U.S., are there at least 200 families waiting two to three times as long as they would if they adopted a Black baby.

    In 2004, only twenty-six percent of Black children adopted from foster care (about 4,200) were adopted transracially. Only two to three percent of all adoptions involve White parents and Black or biracial children.

    Transracial adoptions account for less than twenty percent of all adoptions in the U.S., and most of these are international adoptions.

    While the infamous 1972 statement (now rescinded) in which the Nat’l Assoc. of Black Social Workers referred to transracial adoption as cultural genocide is often blamed for present-day low rates of transracial adoption, this is simply not true. Federal legislation (MEPA) levies fines on federally-funded agencies using race as a factor to deny or delay a child’s placement. Some agencies, either through confusion or racism, actually use MEPA to justify placing barriers to black people trying to adopt black children, or denying such adoptions outright.

    Most race-matching that takes place in adoption happens when White adoptive parents state their preference for White children. Child welfare agencies facilitate this preference and the law does not forbid it.

    “Supply”:

    Black children make up one-third of the foster care population , but they constitute only 15% of the nation’s children overall.

    Black children are four times as likely to be in foster care on a given day as their White counterparts.

    Minority children, and in particular African American children, are more likely to be in foster care than receive in-home services, even when they have the same problems and characteristics as White children.

    Abused and neglected White children are twice as likely as Black children to remain in their own homes and receive social support services (as opposed to foster care).

    Most children in foster care are not there for reasons of abuse, but because of poverty-related neglect.

    Black children remained in foster care twice as long as White children, and receive inferior housing, health, and counseling services.

    Black children are still more likely than White children to remain in foster care rather than being adopted or returned home.

    Over 100,000 children whose parental rights have been terminated are awaiting adoption. More than half of them are Black or Latino.

    In summary…even at “bargain basement” rates, black children are the least adopted of all children. This is not supply and demand at work, in the traditional sense.

    Slackermom wrote:
    “the explanation goes something like…

    “we have few/no families waiting to adopt african-american infants, so our agency supplements the fees so that these children can be placed with families”

    now, assuming that’s the truth (i know, big assumption) it does make sense. if an adoption generally costs the agency $20,000, and the agency still wants to work with babies of color, they are indeed supplementing the fees if the adoption of those babies costs less.”

    There is also the possibility that the inverse is true. That the actual cost to the agency is less than $20K, and yet white babies are placed at $20K because the agency knows people are willing to pay that much.

    My friend and fellow adoptive mom, Shannon, wrote about this, and she addresses the profit motive:

    From http://lilysea.blogs.com/peterscrossstation/2007/11/wendy-asks-me-1.html

    “…The $30K+ adoptions out there are either international with big travel requirements or domestic white newborns I’m going to bet you.

    “Sometimes they say that the brown and black babies are cheaper because they are subsidized by various hard-to-place kid programs. That’s true of the agency that did our homestudy. You can adopt a child through them for free if you take one who is hard-to-place and that can mean Black, over the age of two or with various types of disabilities. The agency has a fund for this. But the agency is still non-profit.

    “It’s also true and don’t let anyone tell you otherwise–that for-profit adoption professionals like some lawyers and (most) adoption “facilitators” will basically price a baby at whatever they think some desperate hopeful parent will and can pay. (See my exchange with such sleaze at the bottom of this post.)

    “And now I will take this opportunity to declare my absolute opposition to all for-profit adoption work as well as “sliding scale” fees for children such as my own. If our agency can do adoptions for under the tax credit, so could an agency placing white babies. If another agency wants to charge more for some adoptions to subsidize some others, let them base this on prospective parents’ income, not on race. This “we have to charge less for Black babies because Black parents can’t afford to adopt” is a dumb and unneccesary way to deal with the issue. I’m fine with rich people subsidizing adoption for less rich people. There’s no need to base it on race.”

  25. Kohana wrote:

    “There is so much I would have done differently but had I done it differently, Madison wouldn’t be here. I struggle with knowing how to respond now that my feelings about the choices we made have changed.”

    For me, this statement cuts to the heart of the issue. I pursued an ethical adoption with the knowledge I had at the time we adopted, but since then I’ve learned there is so much more we could have done. But to question the decisions that led to adopting, after you are parenting the child is a sticky spot to be in.

    In addition, there are so many things that need to be changed in the adoption industry. However, the change will take time and meanwhile, children are being placed for adoption through agencies and facilitators that have less than ethical practices. In my opinion, reform needs to begin in society in general and in the systems that should support women in pregnancy, as well as in the adoption industry.

    While we are waiting for that to happen, people adopting often have limited choices because of their own circumstances. Personally, the challenges of adopting as an expatriate leave me with very few, if any choices in adoption. While I was living in the U.S., I had a broad array of options to pursue adoption and I could filter them through my ethics requirements. Now, not so much.

    I think that it is very challenging to know if and how we will communicate about choices in the adoption process that we would do differently now.

    and PS-I am AMAZED at the cost of adoption here in Australia. Just in looking at International fee structures, the fees range from $700 to $14,000 with many being under $5,000.

  26. deesha wrote:

    h sofia: You raise a great point about the perspective from an adult adoptee. In the process of writing an article about transracial adoption, I realized that I was totally biased as an adoptive mom of a young child. The article really did not “work” until I included the voices of adult TR adoptees and their activism.

    That said, people differ, and just as adult TRA range on a continuum from those who consider themselves transracial abductees to those who have no interest in their cultures of origins, I’m wondering if there are a range of opinions from adult adoptees regarding how they would feel if they weren’t told about the fee structure.

  27. deesha wrote:

    **gm wrote:

    Why are AA children not being adopted?**

    –personal preference of adoptive parents

    –racism, fear of the child and/or one’s family/community’s acceptance of the child

    –mythology about how so many Black children are/were “crack babies”

    –personal preference for international over domestic adoption in general, for a whole host of reasons

    Adoption facilitators report some White American parents openly stating preferences for “anything but a Black child.”

    And yet, while Americans adopt more foreign-born, non-White children than all other countries combined, ironically, we are also one of the largest “suppliers” of Black infants to other countries, such as Canada, England, Germany, and Switzerland. In recent years, one agency alone, Adoption Link, a Chicago-based service specializing in placement of Black children, has facilitated over 700 such adoptions. One agency in Florida places 90% of its Black infants with Canadian parents.

  28. kathy wrote:

    Dawn, I agree with you that this is a topic that should be discussed with our children, my children have heard a variety of questions surrounding the cost of adoption from adults as well as other children.
    Mirah,
    you write:
    “Perhaps you might ask yourself if your goal is to raise an anti-racist child or a child who is proud of you for being so ultra liberal, super PC and anti-racist? Adoptive parents need to be careful lest their child be made to feel – even in the most subtle way – GRATEFUL.”
    I think you have a lot of insight, and I so agree with you on that.

    Deesha, I am curious, I read a while ago that some African American children remain in foster care in order to maintain benefits for a related family member to be able to continue to care for the child. I think it was an article in the NY times. Do you have any more information on that?

    I am also curious to know if the fee structures are related to profitability, if an agency makes more money from, say, Russia, over China, over domestic?

  29. bms2000 wrote:

    My 7 year old (adopted from Guatemala) flat out asked me: “How much did we cost?” My answer was: “You were free. But we had to pay money for the lawyer’s time, and the foster moms to care for you, and the social worker to help us with the forms, and the plane tickets, and all the documents. That cost x dollars.” To me, this is the truth. My kids did not come with a price tag on their behinds, but there are a lot of people who were involved in getting us together, and they have to make a living too.

    I sort of understand the sentiment of people who believe that no money should exchange hands for adoption. But the reality is that people do need to eat and pay bills (and some people are just rotten swindlers, but we will leave them out for now). I’m not sure how to respond to the ‘discounted’ kids, and I’m not sure how helpful that information would be to a child. As someone else said, be sure to consider your motivations for sharing this info.

  30. Sharon wrote:

    Re Deesha’s post: I would argue that the “market” for adoptions from foster care and the “market” for infants are largely separate markets. I believe that most prospective adopters of infants are people who’ve experienced infertility and who specifically want a baby, whereas many (most?) adopters through the foster care system are not. Rather, my guess is they are older, more likely to be kin to the children they are adopting, and less likely to be white. So, while I’m interested in the stats you present, I am not sure how relevant they are to domestic infant adoption and the related prices that agencies charge for infant adoptions. My belief is that healthy African American infants do not generally wait for placements, though I have no stats on this.

    Also, regarding stats: stats (of questionable quality) are available on adoptions through the child welfare system and (through visa information) on international adoptions. But, as far as I know, reliable nationally representative stats in domestic infant adoptions are non-existent. I’m curious where you got your stat on the average wait time of the relative wait times of parents interested in adopting black vs. white children (was that for the foster care system, too?)

    One thing that strikes me is that the adoption “market” for private adoptions is so NON centralized. I.e., a major metro area may have a dozen adoption agencies, in addition to the private adoptions that are arranged. So I wonder (and suppose it may be the case) that the “demand” and wait time for infants of different races may vary drastically by region. E.g., if people wait a year or more to adopt an infant of any race here in one area, is it possible that infants of certain races are actually hard to place in other areas? I guess so, if some agencies offer reduced rates for the adoption of black infants!

    One additional point… the issue of TPR is tricky. Some courts will not terminate parental rights unless a child has an identified adoptive resource (i.e., has been matched with a prospective adoptive family). Other courts feel differently. So the number of TPR’d children is not always a good measure of the number of children who potentially need adoptive families.

  31. Shannon wrote:

    Great post, Dawn; Deesha, thanks for the shout-out.

    To those who say this is not really part of the child’s story, I beg to differ. Inasmuch as a Black child will be a Black adult in a white supremacist society, having begun as a “bargain baby” is absolutely part of that story and a great place to start teaching them about the complex effects of racism in this culture.

    I think the folks here insisting this isn’t a child’s business (even in adulthood) are finding a way to bury their heads in the sand because the issue is complex and painful.

    I was indeed told all about my hospital bills for birth–born in an Army hospital during Vietnam and the bill was $7–I was a bargain! It was in my baby book and considered a cute story.

    But, I’m a white baby, so no one made any inferences about MY value as a person based on this, did they? Seems to me those uncomfortable inferences are what make parents not tell their their children–not some noble sense that these are not issues appropriate or important to tell.

    The thing I don’t share with Dawn is any sense of regret of guilt about the lower adoption cost we paid. As I point out in the blog post Deesha quoted, if our agency (working exclusively with Black and Black-biracial babies) can place babies under the tax credit, so can any non-profit agency for any race child. Parents shouldn’t feel guilty for getting a lower priced adoption. Agencies that charge more than they need to should feel guilty.

  32. dawn wrote:

    Mirah, I don’t feel guilty about using the program. I wouldn’t use it now knowing that there are other options (every agency we looked at had the same kind of fee structure but we only looked at agencies in our city so it’s possible that there are others in our state that didn’t — we wouldn’t have looked out of state regardless). But it’s also a moot point because I’m not even thinking about ever adopting again.

    So Mirah — knowing how strongly you feel about honesty and truth in adoption, would you be arguing that I should shred her adoption documents? Because it’s all there in the agency brochure and paperwork that I believe belong to my daughter. (Heck, I kept all the hospital info for my son, too. It’s their histories and they have a right to it.)

    I resent the implication that this is about appearing “ultra liberal, super PC and anti-racist” to my kid.

    Are kids aren’t raised in bubbles. It’s sure not outside of the realm of possibility that my daughter will learn about racist fee structures from someone/someplace else and will come home asking questions. I intend to answer ‘em honestly.

    I think people are misunderstanding that sometime I’m going to sit her down and give her a lecture about how marketing in adoption works but I’m talking about answering her questions honestly even when those questions make me uncomfortable.

  33. janine demanda wrote:

    dawn,

    i am neither an adoptee or an adoptive parent, and i’m aware that my perspective might be different if i were. that said, i think your decision to discuss the racist fee structure {and there is NO doubt in my mind that it’s precisely that} with your daughter at some point is a responsible and loving one.

    mirah said, “Honesty shouldn’t be hurtful.” and frankly, my jaw dropped. no, ideally, it shouldn’t be. in the same vein, racism shouldn’t exist at all, and further, the circumstances that provide a “supply” of babies and children for adoption shouldn’t either.

    some folks excuse their decisions not to address those problematic realities with their children with that sort of cop-out. from what adult transracial-adoptees have told me of their experiences, this undermines the child’s faith in their transracially-adoptive parent{s} and their capacity to navigate those realities with as little damage to their psyches as possible.

    as to the same responder’s adultery analogy, again, i have to say, “cop-out.” i have difficulty imagining that any one would prefer to be lied to for years or even the entirety of their lives {whether actively or by omission is frankly irrelevant imho} by someone they love and trust instead of having that person share a truth that is likely to be painful and difficult to navigate. when someone speaks a fraught truth like this, they are not simply hoping for forgiveness, they are also taking the enormous risk of rejection for their past choices, and in this instance, i would say this risk is/will be taken out of profound love and respect for their child and the integrity of their relationship with their child.

    peace.

  34. Lula wrote:

    Hello to all (and special hello to Dawn and Shannon). Thanks for this discussion — interesting points raised, and thanks esp. to Deesha for her research.

    Personally, I think the question of telling vs. not telling your adopted child about their adoption fee is moot, since they will be able to easily access TRA information from the time period in which they were born if they want to, at whatever age. Long live the internet! It’ll all be there in electronic format for them, regardless of whether they were adopted domestically or internationally. The days of controlling your child’s access to sensitive information are over, so I’m not sure how people are figuring to avoid the possibly painful racial-fee structure conversation. As far as I can tell, it’s not even an option.

    We’re in the homestudy process, and working with an agency that we feel is doing most things right most of the time. That’s about as good as it’s going to get right now, at least where we live. This agency has a separate program for African American adoption, which is supported by government grants and a private endowment. The costs incurred for pre- and post-placement services to women and their children and to adopting families are the same as for their “base domestic program”, but the African American adoption progam and placement fees are subsidized by the grants and endowment. So yeah, it costs less to adopt through this specific African American program. But this agency also has a good reputation for providing lifetime support services to everyone they work with, so I at least feel good about how the money they take in from fees is used.

    I would love to see sliding-fee scale adoption fees based on PAP income, but that’s something we’ll work on for the future — it’s not an option for us today. Right now, we have a support network encouraging us to adopt a child of African descent, and an agency with a program that can help us do that affordably. It’s not a decision we’re making based on finances, but I won’t say I feel guilty for going with this agency’s program. It would be great if they had subsidies and a private endowment for children of Anglo, Hispanic, and Asian descent as well, but they don’t. Is it because adopting parents are already so motivated to adopt children of those racial/ethnic groups that they are easily placed? I don’t know — all I know is that even healthy African American children are still considered “hard to place” in this day and age. That’s a situation that seems determined to stick regardless of how adoption is priced or financed, and that’s damn messed up.

    I don’t think there’s any way to hide these facts from our children, esp. once they’re school-aged. Our task is to help them put their birth circumstances into a workable context, and sit with them as they process the suckful realities. That’s true for any adoption, and the extra layers of suck that come with transracial adoption just mean more work for everyone. Avoidance is futile, and IMO a disrespect to adopted people as well.

  35. deesha wrote:

    Hi, Sharon…

    You wrote: “Re Deesha’s post: I would argue that the “market” for adoptions from foster care and the “market” for infants are largely separate markets.”

    In many ways, they are, but in terms of preferences of adoptive parents, and which children are more likely to be placed, there is no difference that I’ve been able to find documented. And it is, in part, the preferences of prospective adoptive parents that drive agencies to the race-based fee structure. What we see with the foster care stats–that black children are the least likely to be adopted–is borne out with private placement as well. I am not trying to be sarcastic, but if this were not true, we wouldn’t be having this discussion. Agencies deem black children as “hard to place”, there is no waiting list of those seeking to adopt black children as there are for white children–this is because these children are the “least preferred.”

    **I believe that most prospective adopters of infants are people who’ve experienced infertility and who specifically want a baby, whereas many (most?) adopters through the foster care system are not. Rather, my guess is they are older, more likely to be kin to the children they are adopting, and less likely to be white. So, while I’m interested in the stats you present, I am not sure how relevant they are to domestic infant adoption and the related prices that agencies charge for infant adoptions. **

    Please see my first response above.

    Also, I provided the additional stats on foster care and race-based disparities in how children end up there because very often in these discussions, someone wonders why there are so many black children “available” for adoption in the first place.

    In general, I don’t care about the differences between private and public adoptions. Adoption reform is needed in both arenas for many reasons, including race-based inequities.

    **My belief is that healthy African American infants do not generally wait for placements, though I have no stats on this.**

    I’m curious–again, no sarcasm–as to why you believe this.

    At any rate, it’s not true. Healthy black infants may not wait as long as an older child or one with special needs, but they wait longer than healthy white infants, and again, this is the reason given for the race-based fee structure.

    A big part of the reason I’m an adoptive parent today is that our agency called us (my ex and I had only stopped in to gather some info one day, but ultimately tabled the discussion) saying, “We have a two-day old black infant in the next county whose mother wants to place her for adoption, and while we have many families waiting, none are waiting for a black baby. Some might consider a biracial child, but none are willing to adopt a black baby. So we were wondering…” Slackermom reported a similar experience. Fellow adoptive parent friends and neighbors report the same.

    When that first first-mom changed her mind, we decided to continue to pursue adoption, and so the agency placed our profile on their national database. In less than 24 hours, we had three black expectant mothers/couples interested in us. If their infants had been white, each of those families would have had their pick of adoptive parents. Instead, they had to wait and see if we would choose them. I felt horrible. One mother in particular was very distressed when ultimately we did not choose to adopt her child. As anyone here who has adopted or placed a child for adoption knows, the process is fraught with pain as well as joy. I still think about that child today.

    **Also, regarding stats: stats (of questionable quality) are available on adoptions through the child welfare system and (through visa information) on international adoptions. But, as far as I know, reliable nationally representative stats in domestic infant adoptions are non-existent. I’m curious where you got your stat on the average wait time of the relative wait times of parents interested in adopting black vs. white children (was that for the foster care system, too?)**

    Anecdotal evidence, blogs, and books such as “Shattered Bonds” by Dorothy Roberts, bear out the long wait times stat, but to answer your question, a private (non-profit, I think) agency in Chicago specializing in black infant adoptions provided that stat:

    http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=547647&page=1
    http://www.adoption-link.org/services.aspx

    Adoption and foster care stats are also available here:http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/stats_research/index.htm#cw

    However, these stats may fail your unspecified litmus test for being of sound quality and/or nationally representative.

    **One thing that strikes me is that the adoption “market” for private adoptions is so NON centralized. I.e., a major metro area may have a dozen adoption agencies, in addition to the private adoptions that are arranged. So I wonder (and suppose it may be the case) that the “demand” and wait time for infants of different races may vary drastically by region. E.g., if people wait a year or more to adopt an infant of any race here in one area, is it possible that infants of certain races are actually hard to place in other areas? I guess so, if some agencies offer reduced rates for the adoption of black infants!**

    Well, you’ve created your own logic loop, which I don’t particularly follow, so I have no specific response. Generally speaking, however, many agencies operate nationally, and in some cases internationally, to place black children, so I’m not sure how much the agency’s location would matter.

    **One additional point… the issue of TPR is tricky. Some courts will not terminate parental rights unless a child has an identified adoptive resource (i.e., has been matched with a prospective adoptive family). Other courts feel differently. So the number of TPR’d children is not always a good measure of the number of children who potentially need adoptive families.**

    I didn’t cite the number of TPRed children. What I wrote was this:

    “Over 100,000 children whose parental rights have been terminated are awaiting adoption. More than half of them are Black or Latino.”

    The statistic is specifically for waiting children and can be found here:
    http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/stats_research/afcars/tar/report14.htm

  36. janet wrote:

    when i started the adoption process, specifically wanting to adopt an AA child, i purposely chose to NOT use an agency that charges lower fees for AA children as opposed to white. i felt sick to my stomach once hearing that, and i found an agency that was more consistent with my value system, that you cannot place a price on any human being.
    with that said, it seems to me that the “wholesale” price that you paid is your issue and i hope that you are able to work through this before you decide to share this with your child. i see no need or reason for you to share this with her…what is to be gained? i am sure there will be plenty of opportunities to discuss racial inequities in our country and you don’t need to use this one as an example.

  37. Talitha wrote:

    I’ve just found this blog and this topic is so intriguing to me. The idea of ‘discounted adoptions’ based on race is something that has always saddened me. But from another perspective. When my husband and I were first married we discussed adoption as something we felt we should do. The idea of children being out there and needing love and a home, when we had both to spare, was heartbreaking for us. We know we can’t change all of their lives but we can be peace and comfort to one or two. (we have no problem having our own, just feel strongly about openning our hearts to others).
    At the beginning a close friend of ours who was a social worker told us how desperately they needed placement for AA children. She was jsut begging us to consider it. Her word were that they were basically ‘giving them away’ to anyone that woudl take them. I n our minds it had never occurred to us that we would stat a preference for or against any race. We just wanted to love a child that needed love. That was 7 years ago and I still feel so sick for those children who need a home so badly. I guess to me they seem more valuable because of the need? I don’t understand how adoptive parents are chosing babies as if they are choosing pedigreed pets. On the other hand, I have been able to bear children on my own so I may see it differently. I feel like a part of our family is missing, but that there are chldren out there who are desperate to fill that space. That statement, exagerated or not, made us WANT to adopt AA children. And we do expect to pay regular fees for them. I was raised in a very non-racist home and it just doesn’t make sense to me to judge on skin color or ethnic background to decide a person or child’s value. I just couldn’t imagine waiting 2 years to adopt a white baby and knowing that in that time, a beautiful brown baby could be needing our home. Why would anyone do that?
    Anyway, your post and all of the comments and statistics are really thought provoking.

  38. Yvette wrote:

    Shannon, I have to laugh at your story: “I was indeed told all about my hospital bills for birth–born in an Army hospital during Vietnam and the bill was $7–I was a bargain! It was in my baby book and considered a cute story.”

    Same for me: Around the time I was born in an Army hospital, my parents’ puppy was hit by a car and had to go to a vet. The only cost to deliver me was a few bucks for my mother’s meals. Meanwhile, care of the puppy ran a few hundred dollars. So they always joked that their bigger investment was in the dog than in me so if it ever came down to it… LOL

    Anyway, back on topic: I think this kind of telling will be a personal decision that any parent will have to decide for her- or himself. But I agree that (1) “kids” will grow up to be adults, and any telling (or not telling) should be done with that in mind, and (2) even as children adoptees will find things out, or be told things by others. So, again, that needs to figure into any decisions.

    In general I do not “fault” non-Black prospective parents for deciding not to parent transracially. In fact, for anyone who has doubts I would hope that they not place their desire to try to overcome any biases they may have on the shoulders of Black kids. In workshops and presentations, I like to point out that most White folks who are parents of bio-related kids have, in effect, made a similar decision not to parent transracially–by virtue of their choice of co-bio-parent or partner. That usually serves to redirect the questions and tsk-tsking about “Why don’t more of these people adopt transracially?”

  39. Yvette wrote:

    Although this conversation is about the problematic aspects of market language and money in adoption, I would also like to point out that some have discussed problems with “gift” language in adoption and donor gamete. “Gift” metaphors may reduce the discomfort with the idea of children as commodities that have different value based on such worth factors as race and health status. But “gift” also implies a level of choice that should not be assumed in all (or perhaps even most) placement situations.

    I think market language is probably the most accurate to use, despite how it makes us cringe. Especially when viewed at more on a macro as opposed to micro level. For example, we may decide as a society that it is more economical to direct resources away from one set of kin to another in order to raise some kids, or that for others it is just better to wait until they are older and direct resources towards them via the criminal justice system…

  40. Mickey wrote:

    I may have overlooked this in the comments, but I have not seen much said about foster-adoptions.

    In TX (at least) the process is pretty streamlined and the state absorbs most of the cost. Plus, depending on the age of the children were adopted, the state also pays for them to go to college.

  41. Pam wrote:

    Perhaps agencies should consider subsidizing adoption for children who have waited longer than a certain amount of time? I understand this might be hard to figure out in the case of infants, who ideally you want to have linked with parents before they are born…but maybe if no adoptive parents have chosen the birth family’s file in a few weeks? or by a few weeks before the birth?

  42. Annette wrote:

    I’m surprised no one has brought up this aspect of racist reduced rate adoption policies. Many states, including my state and the state from which I adopted, allow some cost of living expenses to be paid for (not to) the birth mother, which can add substantially to the adoption fee. As a matter of fact, I found that many agencies that advertise low fees generally don’t advertise that thousands more dollars may be due for birthmother expenses. So the deal is, when researching adoption options, several agencies I spoke with told me that if the *birthmother* is black, the fee isn’t as much because (and this is what they told me, not that I agree or don’t think it’s a stereotypical assumption) these mothers tend to back out after having non-refundable cost of living expenses paid for – so the agencies don’t pay as many expenses for black mothers OR they wait until the mother has relinquished the baby to pay expenses. White mothers, on the other hand, get their expenses paid before birth. So that is one reason why the rate is reduced. In other words, the black mothers are perceived as making an adoption plan just to get some expenses paid, all the while planning to back out. Now if that isn’t racist, I don’t know what is.

    FYI, our biracial (African American/White) son’s birthmother is white, so we ended up only having a few thousand dollars in “reductions.”

    I knew the system was racist going in, but I wouldn’t change anything *I* did, as I now have the most adorable baby in the universe. (Sorry, other parents, but there can only be one!) And yes, someday I will certainly discuss this with with my son someday. Not discussing this with him certainly won’t protect or shield him from all the other racist crap he’ll most likely face in his life. Somewhere in the essay, it was written: “Knowing will cut to the core of his self-esteem – knowing that he was less valued in the adoption baby market might make him feel that he truly does have less value.” My response to this statement is: well, aren’t there many aspects of American society that already value people of color less? I think the ongoing challenge is to raise my son so *he* knows he is of value and has worth, even if everyone out there doesn’t think so. Not discussing one aspect of racism won’t erase all the other aspects that could make him feel bad.

  43. deesha wrote:

    I’ve heard that Ohio just outlawed race-based fee structures. I can’t find a link, but I did find this article of interest:

    http://www.illinoistimes.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A3990

  44. Shannon wrote:

    Yvette said:

    “I think market language is probably the most accurate to use, despite how it makes us cringe. Especially when viewed at more on a macro as opposed to micro level. For example, we may decide as a society that it is more economical to direct resources away from one set of kin to another in order to raise some kids, or that for others it is just better to wait until they are older and direct resources towards them via the criminal justice system…”

    Yes. How on earth are we going to raise kids who are riled up and refuse to take this anymore if we don’t tell them about it because we don’t think it’s pretty? It’s NOT pretty. Adoption IS a market and DOES put prices on people and values them based on race.

    There’s no Santa Claus either.

    I don’t see how my daughters could make it to 21 without knowing about racist adoption fee structures whether I tell them directly about their own “prices” or not. I plan to raise them to know stuff in general and stuff about race in the U.S. specifically and the notion of race-based baby discounts will just be obvious to them.

    And then, when they are on the Supreme Court, we can get our damn constitution back.

    Oh yeah.

  45. Lula wrote:

    The flip side of this discussion is , of course, how parents tell adopted children that they merited “full price” fees. Again, people adopted today are going to grow up well able to access information about the fee structures and ethics conversations at play during the time they were born, so ideally NO adopting parent will be exempt from having to explain how the adoption took place and what it cost. I wouldn’t relish having to explain my motivations to an upset adolescent who’s yelling “You paid more for me because I’m white/Latino/Asian? Why? Did you think you’d get a better kid if you paid more money?!”

    Not to get all Commie, but talking with our kids about the Capitalist market and financial aspect of adoption is not going to be easy no matter what color they are or what color we are. Our responsibility as parents will be to talk about this stuff in a way that makes it clear that WE have not bought into false notions of price-determined human value, even if we adopted during a time when fee structures kind of beg the question. It’s similar to when we talk about the fact that signing pieces of paper does not in reality annul a biological parent’s parenthood, nor in reality transfer “property ownership” of a human being from one person to another. Adoption’s pretty ugly all the way around, no matter how you slice it. Better to prep now for how to talk about all this as a family, don’t you think?

  46. Yvette wrote:

    Go, Shannon! LOL!

  47. Lula wrote:

    And is adoptive parents somehow DO believe that paying more $$ should = better child product… well, that’s just gross.

  48. Sharon wrote:

    Deesha,

    Thanks so much for your response. Also, I too was not trying to be sarcastic, and I also defnitely agree there is a problem, so I appreciate your tone, as well.

    You asked why I have the impression that black infants do not wait for adoption. The answer is a little ironic, since I am a data and numbers person: it’s based on my own personal and anecdotal experience. I live in the DC area, and I am familiar with a couple private agencies (I know, very small N). The ones I am familiar with that handle domestic adoptions only work locally (in the DC metro area, including VA and MD.) They do not charge differential rates for adoption of white vs. non-white children (though I has heard before this blog post that occurred elsewhere and am disturbed by it). The wait for an infant of any race at the agencies I know of locally is months or even years long. I do know one white adoptive family who lived in the DC area who turned to a Florida agency to adopt her 2 children, b/c she was open to a TRA and had heard the wait for adoption was much shorter in FL. She did end up adopting African American infants fairly quickly, but I thought she still had to wait some months for the placement. Also, I am not sure if all agencies work this way, but at least in some cases, it’s hard for prospective adopters to work with more than one agency. The ones I’m familiar with charge significant “downpayments” (or whatever you want to call it) in order to officially become a waiting parent. This is why the “decentralization” of adoption agencies seemed relevant to me. Waiting families who would be thrilled to adopt any healthy baby may happen to be working with agencies for whom infants of all races are easy to place. But, because these families are committed to a particular agency with which the wait time to adopt ANY infant is long, they never learn about the need for adoptive parents for black infants elsewhere… and end up with the impression (based on their own narrow experience) that Afrcian American infants do not wait for placements.

    I think a problem with my entry is that I was rambling (e.g., my comment on TPR was not relevant)… Since I was already familiar with the AFCARS data, what I was especially interested in was the information you had on children outside the child welfare system, since that is less readily available. I was curious and will follow up on the links you provided. Despite any problems with AFCARS, it is clear that racial disproportionality in the public system unquestionably exists. I was aware of this previously, and I absolutely agree that is a problem. (And I feel it is terrible that any baby that needs adoptive parents would have to wait.)

    I am not naive enough to think racial preferences don’t play a role in adoptions of infants as well as older children. For example, I believe it plays a big role when white families are choosing which country from which to adopt. And I am not surprised that many white families would prefer to adopt a bi-racial child over a black child. I just was not aware that there are apparently some places where it is actually hard to find a placement at all for an African American infant.

    Thanks,
    Sharon

  49. deesha wrote:

    Sharon,

    Thanks for your detailed comments and anecdotes. I feel as though I understand your perspective better.

    About data not compiled by the child welfare system, I wonder if agencies like Adoption Link (who sourced the wait time stat) do independent studies?

    I wonder if the wait times for an black infant in the DC area is longer because there are more potential black adoptive parents in that area than in other parts of the country?

    Which reminds me…recruitment of black PAPs is a huge part of the equation. I was disappointed to learn that recruitment of black parents is included in MEPA legislation, but there are no fines levied for failure to do this (and yet there are for failure to enforce other components of MEPA).

  50. ColoradoDan wrote:

    Deesha, I would guess that the wait time for black infants in the DC area is linked, as you say to demographics of DC.

    As a matter of perspective folks, keep in mind that the U.S is currently about 81% white, 13% Black, 4.5% Asian (depending on which of the lines you look at in Census data).

    If a proportionate number of people by race are adopting, there are alot more white people adopting. People of all races will tend to adopt a child like them. This is what it is. If there are a disproportionate number of black children in the healthy infant adoption system (as in the foster system), it would make sense that the wait for black kids be shorter in whiter areas.

    Some like-race adoptions may be made out of “racism” but also remember that some folks may not be able (through ignorance or situation) to raise a child of another race.

    Even Foster data (AFCARS) shows a pretty good picture of willingness to adopt transracially (based on some statistical assumptions). Kids in foster care: 38% white, 32% black. Kids adopted: 45%white, 27% black. This shows a preference, certainly, but nothing so bad as some people here have mentioned.

    And here are my assumtionst:
    I can only assume that what may be 13% of the adopting population (Black parents) (~half of the 27% of kids adopted) are not adopting 2 kids each while the likely 80% white adoptive parents are adopting roughly 1 kid for every 2 adoptive parents.

    The real cause for concern it seems is this:
    there is a dreary picture of race and parental outcomes for black parents who are disproportionately losing their children into the foster care system…and are 1/3 to 1/4 less likeley to be reunified even when they receive the same job skills, services, and are not substance abusers…socioeconomic and court bias?)

  51. ColoradoDan wrote:

    oops…that figure for kids in foster care was the waiting children number and didn’t include the Hispanic category (my US population figures did include black and white Hispanics)

  52. deesha wrote:

    Dan, thanks for your insights. You wrote:

    “The real cause for concern it seems is this:
    there is a dreary picture of race and parental outcomes for black parents who are disproportionately losing their children into the foster care system…and are 1/3 to 1/4 less likeley to be reunified even when they receive the same job skills, services, and are not substance abusers…socioeconomic and court bias?)”

    This is absolutely my primary concern. The only reason, in my opinion, that people’s willingness (or lack thereof) to adopt transracially is even part of this discussion is that it lies behind the rationale agencies give for the race-based fee structures–not because I wish to compel more people to adopt transracially.

  53. deesha wrote:

    Kathy, I totally meant to respond to this!

    “Deesha, I am curious, I read a while ago that some African American children remain in foster care in order to maintain benefits for a related family member to be able to continue to care for the child. I think it was an article in the NY times. Do you have any more information on that?”

    I hadn’t heard about this, but it’s interesting. Yvette, any info?

    I am reminded of Yvette’s point about how as a society we shift around benefits/resources. We can fund housing, job training, and drug programs to help a mother better care for her kids–or fund foster care for a relative to care for her kids, or later fund prisons for neglected kids who fall into lives of crime. I’m oversimplifying of course (somewhat), but where and when we provide resources really does matter.

  54. deesha wrote:

    **Some like-race adoptions may be made out of “racism” but also remember that some folks may not be able (through ignorance or situation) to raise a child of another race.**

    And some folks aren’t willing to admit to either reason. That’s not to say that everyone *should* be willing to adopt transracially. But sometimes, when people aren’t honest about their reasons for not doing it, black children and parents are disparaged in the process.

  55. Lyonside wrote:

    Dan – I think I’m misunderstanding part of your post. Can you clarify?

    >If a proportionate number of people by race are adopting, there are alot more white people adopting.

    I don’t know if the ratio is proportional. The perception I have (based what I read/hear/see) that the proportion of adoptive families vs. the general population is higher for whites, lower for blacks, even lower for Hispanic and Asians. But unofficial adoptions and fosterages (i.e. grandparents, aunts/uncles raising grandchildren, neices/nephews, etc.) that may be present in the black, Latino, and Asian communities are unlikely to be represented in any stats.

    >People of all races will tend to adopt a child like them.

    OK. But then I have problems jiving that statement with:

    >it would make sense that the wait for black kids be shorter in whiter areas.

    What am I missing?

  56. Lyonside wrote:

    >>But unofficial adoptions and fosterages (i.e. grandparents, aunts/uncles raising grandchildren, neices/nephews, etc.) that may be present in the black, Latino, and Asian communities are unlikely to be represented in any stats.

    ETA: white families also have such unofficial “adoptions” of relatives, or even non-relatives, the same as other groups… but since whites are already highly represented in the adoptive parent population (whether proportional or unproportional to the gen pop)…

  57. shannon wrote:

    On wait-times for Black babies:

    I wonder if Adoption-Link’s wait time is based on the fact that they deal exclusively with Black (and Black biracial) babies in the first place?

    Since people go to them knowing what they will get and having already made the decision to adopt a Black child, they have a pre-sorted list of waiting parents. In an agency that does all races in adoption, they will get a lot of folks looking for a white baby–maybe that will be the bulk of their list and the Black babies are left floundering?

    I have been wondering about this, because I know Adoption-Link’s wait has really gotten long in recent months–as long as some waits for healthy white infants. (It’s great, because it means those moms have more options in choosing families to place with.)

    If D.C. demographics contribute to shorter waits there (and there are LOADS of children waiting in the foster system in D.C.–they don’t even have enough foster homes, let alone adoptive parents for older kids), those same demographics just aren’t true of Adoption-Link’s list. Most of their waiting families are white.

  58. Sharon wrote:

    This is a little late to add to the discussion, but in case anyone’s interested, there was a special issue of _Children and Youth Services Review_ devoted to the topic of racial disproportionality in the child welfare system. It was volume 25 numbers 5/6 in 2003. The studies in this issue address disproportionality at a variety of points in the child welfare system (e.g., racial differences in reporting suspected maltreatment, substantiation of reports, likelihood of placement into foster care, length of time that children stay in foster care, and reasons for exits from the system (e.g., reunification vs. other outcomes).

    On the time that prospective adoptive parents in DC wait for infants: In addition to the fact that the DC area is fairly diverse, my personal impression is that there are MANY people here who’ve delayed childbearing… resulting in very many couples experiencing infertility who are interested in adopting infants (but not older children). I agree with Shannon who (I think) was saying that that this can translate into a better scenario for infants. The greater the number of prospective adoptive parents means that not only do infants not wait for placement, but hopefully the “match” is better. I.e., there will be more of a selection of adoptive families from which birth parents can choose. But unfortunately, children in foster care (who are not infants) are still waiting.

  59. deesha wrote:

    Sharon, thanks for the heads up on that resource.

  60. BCmomtobe wrote:

    This article makes me grateful that adoption is funded by the province in my area. I don’t know very much about the child(ren) I will receive, as I have just filed the papers. But at least I won’t have the task of explaining the difference in fees.

  61. Zach wrote:

    I have a problem with every aspect of this issue being labeled as racist. It undermines the efforts of the adoption agencies and prevents children from finding good homes.

    First, the observed fact that white babies are in higher demand is not, in and of itself, racist. If the share of prospective adoptive parents is disproportionally white compared to the pool of available babies, then this is not surprising. It is not racist for a family to prefer to have a child that is their same race. As has already been discussed, children with parents of different races face more challenges. All other things being equal, it’s in the child’s best interests to be placed with a family of the same race.

    Second, the discounted fee for minority babies is not racist. It’s simply a way to put children that are not as high in demand into homes more quickly. Is the goal of the agency not to put the child into as good a home as possible? If the reality is that a child of a particular race was not likely to be adopted, then why not provide incentives for a family to do so? It reduces the waiting list for white parents who have strong racial preferences for white children, reduces or eliminates the wait for parents who have no racial preference or prefer minority children, and most importantly, it increases the likelihood that a minority baby is adopted. Incentives should be created to maximize the number of babies adopted to good families. Everyone’s best interests are served, particularly the children.

    Thirdly, with regards to the question about the biological mother changing her adoption decision based on the discount, it could go both ways. You assume that she might feel that her baby was “worth” less because of it and then may not put her baby up for adoption. On the other hand, if her main concern is finding a good home, then the discount improves that chance. If I were a parent giving up my child, I would hope that the adoption fee was as low as possible! In fact, I would hope that my child had no fees while all other babies had very high fees. That way, my child would be adopted as soon as possible since he/she would be in highest demand. High-quality families would be fighting over the right to adopt my child, allowing the agency to be extremely selective. In addition, the low cost enables more loving families to be able to afford to adopt, and therefore the agency can be more selective. This is a best-case scenario for the child.

    I think that the sliding scale adoption fees could be counter-productive. While it’s true that lower fees allow more families to adopt, the income limit acts as a filter. To the extent that higher-income families are better able to provide financially for the child, we would want to encourage those families to adopt. That would mean charging lower fees to higher-income families. From the standpoint of the adoption agency, being “fair” to the adoptive parents is secondary to the welfare of the child. Of course, income/financial stability would be lower on the list of criteria than other family factors, such as family environment. Nonetheless, income is still an important factor.

    To summarize, I think that we need to expand our thinking beyond our tendencies to view issues of race as racist. The first step is to not equate the adoption fees to the child’s value. I think everyone here would agree that the welfare of the child is the top priority. To blindly label these practices as racist undermines that goal. We must work within the confines of reality and come up with procedures that put the highest number of children into the highest-quality homes as possible. Criticizing these practices may enable us to pat ourselves on the back for being politically correct and open-minded, but it’s a disservice to the children if it results in one less adoption of a minority baby.

  62. Michelle wrote:

    Did you know that the US is one of (if not the only) “1st World” countries that adopts it’s babies out to other countries? Guess what color those babies are? In Europe and England, transracial families do have the stigma that they have in America, so they do their international adoptions from us. We are in the process of our home study right now. We told the agency that we were open to a baby of any race, and she told us that the baby would be black because so few families are willing to adopt them. There is only one other waiting family right now for minority babies.

    I don’t know how we will approach this with our new baby when he or she is older. I’d probably wait until they were grown to discuss the racial implications of their availability. I can’t see burdening a child with it.

  63. Markus wrote:

    The fee is lower in order to HELP not HINDER black children. I think that is an important distinction.

  64. Cheryl wrote:

    I don’t think it is appropriate to tell a child that they were adopted at a discounted rate. If your daughter choses to ask about it then by all means you should inform her. But if she doesn’t bring it up you shouldn’t feel obligated to tell her.

    I think in the end it could cause more hurt to her if you bring it up. Wait for her to do her research once she’s old enough and i’m sure she will approach you about it.

    I personallly didn’t know about the “discounted” rates for adopting children of specific races/ethnic backgrounds, etc. Maybe one day things will be equal. But in this world, maybe not. It’s sad.

  65. torrey wrote:

    My husband and I are a mixed race couple. I am very much in touch with aspects black culture in our area. I am also in touch with history, civil rights and I am very much for empowering people of all races to be the best that they can be. With that said, many contampary issues facing black people are rooted in racism. However, when it comes to adoption I DO NOT believe the fees are racist. It is simple economics. Whether you want to admit it or not adoption of babies, unfortunately, is the act of buying and selling and therefore the rule of supply and demand applies. Now you could argue that a percentage of black people live in poverty and ingnorance because of poor education and minimal opportunities which stem from racism and old “good ‘ol boy” structures. This poverty and ignorance may lead to more black babies which effects the before mentioned “supply and demand” rule. Either way, I believe that it is wrong and malicious to call adoption agencies or their fee schedule racist.

  66. VA_MOM wrote:

    I am adopting and was adopted. I think cost is a part of your story because the fee was a factor. If you want to be honest you should mention it to your daughter someday maybe as small mention. If you don’t want to I wouldn’t mention it because for many of us a discount was not possible and she really won’t know.

    Though thinking about it from the kid perspective: I will say I think my parents did adopt me because they were impatient! They told me “we didn’t want to wait for a white baby and Asian ones were quicker”. Hmmmm… I already know my family is impatient (as I’m an adult)…and yes they are a bit racist and yes they are a bit cheap. So I am thinking reading this post – interesting as to how it relates to me. By interesting I am thinking .. figures. So I think one tiny aspect will not color a normal person’s perspective of cost and rationale. Its more how you parent and how your child feels overall. Seriously if you are the perfect family, had the perfect adoption – I seriously doubt mentioning cost will make adoptee feel bad. There’s more to it than one aspect.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.