Adoption of children with disabilities: an exploration of the issues for adoptive families

Good, Gretchen A.

doi:10.1080/03004430.2015.1040786

Cited by 16 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The nature, number, and salience of children's intersecting identities dictated the relative ease or difficulty in balancing various school considerations. For example, when children had special needs, parents' options were severely curtailed (Good, ), and although parents often valued family structure diversity and racial diversity, these considerations were deprioritized in the search for a perfect—or good enough—school. On the other hand, when children were White or parents did not view racial diversity as very important, parents were released from considering racial diversity, reducing the challenges that might arise in evaluating different school options.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“There Is No Perfect School”: The Complexity of School Decision‐Making Among Lesbian and Gay Adoptive Parents

Goldberg

Allen

Black

et al. 2018

J of Marriage and Family

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Parents influence their children's educational experiences in part via school selection. This process is particularly complex for families with multiple minority, potentially stigmatized, statuses. This qualitative study examines middle-class lesbian and gay (LG) adoptive parents' school decision-making. Parents' economic resources provided the foundation for how parents weighed child/family identities (children's race, LG-parent family structure, child's special needs) and school-related concerns (e.g., academic rigor). For White gay male-headed families in affluent urban communities, financial resources muted racial and

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“There Is No Perfect School”: The Complexity of School Decision‐Making Among Lesbian and Gay Adoptive Parents

Goldberg

Allen

Black

et al. 2018

J of Marriage and Family

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The need for supports for adoptive parents of children with disabilities has been voiced by U.S. adoption agencies nationwide (Good, 2015;Hill & Finton, 2015). This need was echoed by the families in this study who completed an intercountry adoption of a child with a visual impairment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…Adoption agencies are predicting a drastic increase in adoptions involving children with special needs, including children with visual impairments (Pinderhughes et al, 2013). Good (2015) conducted a systematic literature review to determine the issues of adoptive families of children with disabilities. Although there was limited research found on this topic, a study by Hill and Finton (2015) examined the postadoption needs of families who adopt children with disabilities in the United States.…”

Section: Disability Statusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intercountry Adoption of Children with Visual Impairments: An Exploratory Study

Conroy

2018

Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Although there is much research related to the adoption of children with disabilities in general, there is none that focuses specifically on the experiences of parents who have adopted children with visual impairments (that is, who are blind or have low vision) from outside of the United States (also called “intercountry” or “international” adoption). Methods Fifteen parents of children who were adopted from outside the United States and had visual impairments were interviewed in this exploratory study. The participants all lived in the United States following the adoptions and volunteered to participate in this study in 2015. Research questions focusing on pre-adoption (why and who), challenges, and supports framed the open-ended interviews. The interviews were transcribed and themes emerged through the process of coding. Results Parents shared their personal experiences through interviews. All 15 parents had similarities in the process of adoption. Parents adopted in order to begin or enlarge their families, but did not necessarily go into the process desiring to adopt a child with a visual impairment. Challenges were experienced in the areas of medical, educational, and social-emotional needs. Parents agreed that supports were necessary before, during, and after the adoption process. Discussion The need for supports throughout the entire process of inter-country adoption of a child with a visual impairment was made clear through this study. Adoption agencies and agencies for visually impaired individuals are in a good position to set up support networks and mentorship programs. Implications for practitioners This study only scratches the surface of the topic of intercountry adoption of children with visual impairments. By sharing experiences, attention can be given to issues, and systems can be put into place to better support families in raising internationally adopted children with visual impairments.

show abstract

“…Admittedly, the cost of not permitting women to abort fetuses diagnosed with Down syndrome would generally be higher—even if it cannot be ruled out, as I demonstrated above, that it would be less costly than infanticide in some circumstances. Nonetheless, as I mentioned above, adoption is also an option in these cases [ 39 ]. Equally, there are plausible arguments in favor of the view that fetuses with Down syndrome also have a right to life, which means that permitting their abortion might be gravely wrong.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clashes of consensus: on the problem of both justifying abortion of fetuses with Down syndrome and rejecting infanticide

Friberg‐Fernros

2017

Theor Med Bioeth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although the abortion of fetuses with Down syndrome has become commonplace, infanticide is still widely rejected. Generally, there are three ways of justifying the differentiation between abortion and infanticide: by referring to the differences between the moral status of the fetus versus the infant, by referring to the differences of the moral status of the act of abortion versus the act of infanticide, or by separating the way the permissibility of abortion is justified from the way the impermissibility of infanticide is justified. My argument is that none of these ways justifies the abortion of fetuses diagnosed with Down syndrome while simultaneously rejecting infanticide. Either the justification for abortion is consistent with infanticide, or it is implausible to justify abortion while rejecting infanticide. I conclude the article by making some preliminary remarks about how one might manage the situation posed by my argument.

show abstract

Adoption of children with disabilities: an exploration of the issues for adoptive families

Cited by 16 publications

References 36 publications

“There Is No Perfect School”: The Complexity of School Decision‐Making Among Lesbian and Gay Adoptive Parents

“There Is No Perfect School”: The Complexity of School Decision‐Making Among Lesbian and Gay Adoptive Parents

Intercountry Adoption of Children with Visual Impairments: An Exploratory Study

Clashes of consensus: on the problem of both justifying abortion of fetuses with Down syndrome and rejecting infanticide

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About