Today, a growing number of children are enter-
ing adoptive homes after experiencing life within the
foster care system. Typically, they are older at the
time of adoption placement and have histories of ne-
glect and/or abuse. Some have significant medical
problems. Others manifest serious psychological and
learning difficulties. Prior to the early 1980s, these
special-needs children were considered unadoptable.
As a result, agencies did little to find permanent
homes for them. Starting in the early 1980s, however,
adoption agencies, guided and supported by federal
legislation and financial incentives, became much
more successful in placing these children with adop-
tive families. Although research has shown that spe-
cial-needs adoptions are associated with less
placement stability and greater adjustment problems
among family members than are infant adoptions,
the more remarkable and encouraging finding is that
the vast majority of these placements remain intact
and family members report a reasonably high degree
of satisfaction with the adoption outcome.
Another area that has received considerable at-
tention in the adoption field is the placement of chil-
dren across racial lines. Critics of transracial adoption
have argued that this practice not only undermines
children’s self-esteem, racial identity, and emotional
stability, but also promotes racial and cultural geno-
cide. In contrast, individuals who support transracial
adoption emphasize that children’s interests are best
served by placing them in a nurturing and stable fam-
ily as quickly as possible, even if the children are of
a different race than the parents, rather than waiting
until an in-racial adoptive placement can be achieved.
Although research has shown that most children who
are placed across racial lines show similar patterns of
psychological adjustment as those individuals who are
adopted in-racially, questions still remain regarding
the long-term impact of transracial adoption, espe-
cially in relation to the development of a secure racial
identity.
Perhaps the greatest controversy in the adoption
field since the 1970s has been the emergence of open-
ness in adoption, including the movement toward un-
sealing adoption records. With the creation of the
adoption agency system in the early part of the twen-
tieth century, emphasis was placed on maintaining
confidentiality in the adoption process. Adoption re-
cords were sealed by law, and birth parents and adop-
tive parents were prevented from sharing identifying
information with one another. As a result, adopted in-
dividuals grew up knowing little about their back-
ground, having little or no contact with birth family
members, and being prevented from having access to
their original birth certificate. In the last three dec-
ades of the twentieth century, however, there was a
Since the 1970s, many of the restrictive criteria for adoptive
parenthood have been eliminated. As a result, adoption has become
a remarkably complex social service practice and a highly diverse
form of family life. (AP/Wide World Photos)substantial shift toward greater openness in adoption.
It has since become quite common for birth parents
and adoptive parents to create an adoption plan in
which the two families share information on an ongo-
ing basis and even have periodic contact with one an-
other. A number of states (e.g., Tennessee, Oregon,
Alaska, Kansas) have also passed laws allowing adult
adoptees access to their original birth certificate. In
addition, a growing number of adult adoptees and
birth parents are seeking to make contact with one
another. Although critics of openness in adoption
have expressed concerns that these types of changes
in adoption policy, practice, and law will have dire
consequences for birth parents and adoptive parents,
as well as for adoptees, research has thus far failed to
support these concerns. Still, most social service and
mental health professionals do not view either open
adoption or the unsealing of adoption records as a
panacea for the problems experienced by birth par-
ents, adoptive parents, and adoptees. Rather, the
movement toward openness is seen as a way of remov-
ing the veil of secrecy that has been associated with
adoption for some time, thereby offering all parties
a greater sense of personal control over their ownADOPTION 13