Multicultural families: Deracializing transracial adoption

Abstract

In 2010, the Coalition government announced its plans for adoption reform which included 'removing barriers' to transracial adoption. The government has blamed social workers' looking for 'perfect ethnic matches' for denying black and minority ethnic children placements with 'loving and stable families'. The paper draws upon qualitative research with professionals and parents, which shows that the government has failed to take into account the complex ways in which race and ethnicity matter within adoption. Their wish to deracialize transracial adoption fits with wider concerns about race mixing, families and national belonging in multicultural Britain. While they attempt to minimize the importance of race and ethnicity, they continue to place race at the heart of these debates.

Adoption wars: inequality, child welfare and (social) justice

“…Some aspects of this relate to health issues such as the alleged exclusion of those who smoke or are overweight, but even more heavyweight matters stem from intersections with factors such as class, ethnicity, sexual orientation and age and less so, religion, marital status and lone parenthood. Gove bracketed all the alleged restrictions as 'left-wing prescriptions' (Ali, 2014: 72) although discriminating against older applicants or single parents, for instance, might seem more conservative and traditionalist than 'left wing'.…”

“…In particular, it is blamed by critics for denying BME children the chance of adoption while agencies seek a 'perfect ethnic match', when what matters crucially is love. Yet this portrayal can be seen as highly simplistic, whether in terms of explaining ethnicised patterns of adoption and alternative exit routes from care (Owen and Statham, 2009), the practices of adoption agencies (Dance et al 2010) or broader racialized dynamics within adoption (Ali, 2014).…”

(De)racializing “common sense”: media perspectives on adoption reform in England

“…Times, November 16.) Yet, as the experiences of adopted adults and more contemporary research attest (Jennings 2006;Ali 2014), willingness alone gives no indication of racial literacy or networks. One of the principal effects of media coverage of thwarted adoption was to overestimate the scale and scope of interest among white applicants in adopting BAME children.…”

Still the ‘trusty anvil’?: media perspectives on adoption reform in England

“…Drawing from wider literature on child protection, it can be argued that the media contribute significantly to agenda setting, problem framing, resource allocation and public and political opinion and may indirectly shape practice (Ayre, 2001;Franklin and Parton, 1991;Gough, 1996). Anzil (2013) has argued that coverage serves to promote 'collective imaginaries' regarding the nature and operation of adoption, while both Jacobson (2013) and Ali (2014) have found evidence of media influence over perceptions and choices of prospective adopters.…”