e-mail
As adoptive parents, especially transracially adopting parents, we are bound to run into some bias out there. We all know what racism is, right? And sexism? What about “adoptism”? A term coined by Gail Steinberg and Beth Hall, co-founders of PACT, they define it as follows:
A belief that forming a family by birth is superior to forming a family by adoption.
A belief that keeping a child with his/her biological parents is inherently better than placing a child for adoption.
A belief that for those growing up as adopted people, the primary determinant of human traits and capacities is genetics
A belief that differences in family-building structures or methods produces an inherent superiority in families of a particular structure or method.Prejudice or discrimination against members of the adoption triad.
They believe that all members of the triad are victims of “adoptism” and describe it thus:
For birth parents, it’s the view that parents who choose adoption for their children are considered not as good or as valid as parents who parent their children – even by those who love them best.
For children who are adopted, it’s the view that people who are placed for adoption are not considered to have been as valued by their birth parents as children raised within their original families. Even from those who love them best, unexpected comments may reinforce the stereotype that adopted means rejected, cast-off, bad seed, etc.
For adoptive parents, it’s the view – even by those who love them best – that adoption is second-best, that families formed by adoption are not as valid as those formed by birth.
I have seen that reflected on these blogs a number of times – most recently when one mom said her biggest fear when it came to adopting was that she would never measure up, never be good enough for her adopted children.
Steinberg and Hall also said
Adoptism is a cultural belief that families formed by adoption are truly less connected that are birth families, that birth families should be preserved at all costs and under all circumstances; that people who were adopted were first rejected, maybe for a reason. No matter what place you hold in the adoption triad, such judgments and discrimination feel the same. As a society, we tend to understand the dangers of bias based on race, gender or class. Adoptism is no different. Adoptism is just as damaging.
What do you think? Have you been a victim of adoptism? I know I have and frankly, I love that there is a word for it. I’ll have more thoughts to share. Please share yours.
This is great! An anti-adoptism movement is needed NOW. Perhaps having the word will make it easier to combat the prevasive miasma that surrounds the adoption world at almost every turn.
Thanks for posting this, Holly.
I did not know about this word but we have very much come across this treatment.
Not certain that I buy it. Some of those items DO may sense to me – not always or in every case, but…
The most common way we experience this is when someone finds out the girls are adopted and their very first comment is a sad, sympathetic, “Oh, you couldn’t get pregnant?” I hate what’s implied: You poor thing, you had to resort to adoption to have kids?
I just combat that attitude one conversation at a time by responding cheerfully that we have no fertility problems, we just wanted them in our family.
I’m not one to don any kind of victim mentality, though, as is common when discussing the -isms. I just consider it my opportunity to educate others.
Holly, This is an excellent post and one that many of us out there need to hear more about.
I totally agree and have (and continue too) experience “Adoptism” with family, friends, strangers, and here at these blogs.
As an aside,I was fortunate to meet Beth Hall at a transracial family conference in Kansas a little over a year ago and she is a fabulous person. She and I talked after the presentations and I think she has a pretty fair idea of what is portrayed in our culture concerning adoption and adoptism. This lady has done her homework!
Here is the website for pact, a great resource.
http://www.pactadopt.org/
I can understand how adoptive families could be frustrated by people’s assumptions and beliefs about adoption. Some of the comments you’ve had to receive have been grossly inappropriate and had to be either extremely irritating or incredibly painful. However, I don’t care for this “adoptism” framework at all. The ‘ism” suffix is generally reserved for phenomena where a group or a dominant class exert power over another group of people in such a way as to deny them their basic human/civil rights. Racism, sexism and age-ism are good examples. If any groups in the triad are denied their basic human and civil rights, it is the birth/first parent group and the adoptees, who are often wrenched apart (and forced to live with the consequences) by factors having more to do with age-ism and social class than anything else. The basic assumptions of this framework, although they mention all members of the triad, tend to favor adoptive families, in general.
Second, the research DOES support the belief that a child is inherently better with its biological parents. There are consequences for separation even given wonderful, nearly perfect adoptive families. The only justifications for separation are things that are so extreme they stand to damage the child more than separation (e.g. substance abuse, pedophilia, violence, severe mental or physical illness).
I don’t know if I agree with that completely, Thomasina.
Also I wish people would just CHILL with the isms. Some people have this frustrating tendency to generalize that drives me completely insane. All circumstances are different, why not look at it on an individual basis? I have such a hard time with anti-adoption people because of how they paint which such a broad brush.
Sometime adding an -ism to the vocabulary is the only way to heighten the public consciousness to rethink a thought process, in this case assumptions, both overly positive and negative, about adoption. I have experienced both.