In 1904, a group of forty New York orphans were sent to live with Catholic families in Arizona. However, the Catholics turned out to be Mexicans and the local Anglos were so outraged at this race boundary transgression that they instigated a mass abduction of the children.
Through this direct action, trans-racial adoption as a white privilege was resolutely reinforced. This privilege continues in the contemporary era. One can only imagine the reactions if white European children were to be sent to Latin American or African countries for international adoption.
In the pre-Civil Rights United States, a handful of states even went so far as to legislate against interracial adoption or even fostering of white children by non-whites, and in the late 1990s a widely publicized controversy erupted, when a black woman in Detroit wanted to adopt a white girl.
- Tobias Hübinette, Between European Colonial Trafficking, American Empire-Building and Nordic Social Engineering: Rethinking International Adoption From a Postcolonial and Feminist Perspective
Oh my god…
So it’s ok for white parents to collect light-skinned Latin@s like they’re Pokemon…but arjhgjhhj
WHAT. THE BLUE BLOODY FUCKKKKKKK
THEY’RE STILL STEALING NATIVE AMERICAN CHILDREN AND PLACING THEM WITH WHITE FAMILIES IN DEFIANCE OF THE INDIAN CHILD WELFARE ACT
Adoption is not a white privilege. The government controls adoption and furthers white privilege, yes. But to claim that in and of it’s self adoption is a white privilege is ridiculous. There are white children in the foster care system as well. And according to aspe.hhs.gov, about 40% of children are adopted trans-racially, only 21% of domestic adoption is trans-racial. Leaving 60% of all adoption, and 79% of in-nation adopted children with people of their ethnicity.
Secondly, there’s nothing inherently WRONG with trans-ethnic adoption, there are some people who “collect light-skinned Latin@s like they’re pokemon” but there’s also a lot of people who can’t have children on their own that adopt trans-ethnically. And yes I do recognize there is a HUGE problem with so much defiance of the Indian child welfare act, and yes I do know that that is more or less stealing native american children just to place them in white homes, but the assumption that ALL trans-racial adoption is stealing children from their homes to give them to white people is ridiculous. A lot of children in foster homes are there because they were abused or abandoned, not all of them, but a lot. If we’re talking about staying with in their own country, and so their own language and at least somewhat their own culture, there’s no reason to assume that because one or both adoptive parents has a white background, they’re going to be bad parents (not actually caring for the child or disrespecting and erasing their cultural background IS bad parenting).
The problem ISN’T white people wanting to adopt children, the problem IS that the government in certain places prevents and makes it harder for POC to adopt. But even so, this isn’t true EVERYWHERE. I know this from personal experience. There are places in the America where they try to place the child with a family of their own ethnicity, is this better? I’m not sure. But I wouldn’t say trans-racial adoption is always bad or worse.
And again, THERE’S WHITE KIDS IN FOSTER HOMES TOO. THERE IS NO PRIVILEGE IN BEING ADOPTED OR WAITING TO BE ADOPTED. THERE IS NO PRIVILEGE IN ADOPTION IN AND OF ITS SELF.
What you are saying is that the adoptive parent’s skin color is more important then the adopted child’s quality of life and THAT IS NOT TRUE. A child ought to be placed in the best suited available home for them, be it within or outside their own ethnic group.
I do acknowledge the problem with taking native american children away from their communities, and I totally understand there is an abuse of power that is allowing white people a better chance to adopt. That doesn’t make adoption a privilege and that doesn’t make trans-racial adoption wrong. That means the adoption system is corrupt and ought to be fixed, but you’re placing the importance of adoption in the hands of the parents. It’s not about the parents, it’s about the children and focusing on the privileges of the parents ignores the disadvantages faced by children who lose, are taken from, or abandoned by their biological parents and often face neglect and abuse (from adults and peers) before and sometimes during the foster care and adoption process.
Edit: i’m talking ONLY about domestic adoption, international adoption is a whole different ball game. I would /think/ ignoring the ICWA is closer to international then domestic adoption since Native American Communities (I usually hear the word tribe but i don’t think that’s the right word so i’ll say community) are in some ways separate from The “Main Stream” United States.