Adoption Near and Far: A Comparison of American, Romanian and Indian Domestic Adoptions

1
Adoption Near and Far A Comparison of American,
Romanian and Indian Domestic Adoptions

• Victor Groza , Ph. D.
• Professor of Social Work
• Mandel School of Applied Social Sciences11235
  Bellflower RoadCase Western Reserve
  UniversityCleveland, Ohio 44106(216) 368-6682

2
Key Learning Objectives

• To provide participants with the necessary
  background for understanding adoption practice in
  other countries
  
• To learn about family and child policy and
  adoption policy and practice in Romania and
  India, contrasting their system with the American
  system
• To understand the logistics and issues that
  emerge in conducting adoption research in other
  countries

3
Year of Study by Country

• United States, 1990-1994
• Romania, 1999
• India, 2001

4
MethodsIssues to Consider

• Sample
• Clinic vs. Community
• Random vs. Convenience
• Comparison Group
• Approach
• Single method (quantitative or qualitative) vs.
  mixed methods
  
• Surveys (In home, in office or via mail)
• Observational approaches
• Case Studies

5
MeasuresIssues to Consider

• What we choose to measure should be informed by
  theory
  
• We need to balance assessing problems with
  assessing strengths

6
(No Transcript)
7
(No Transcript)
8
MeasuresInstruments used in various countries
9
Lessons Learned about Research

• Involve parents in study design
• Involve parents in reviewing results
• Deconstruct major trends to look for nuances
• Draw from multiple perspective including
  behavioral genetics, child development,
  psychology and social work

10
Across countrieslessons learned about research

• Research instruments should be viewed by families
  and pre-tested in country when possible/practical,
  particularly for cultural sensitivity/relevance.
  
• Be prepared to make daily modifications in
  translations for the first week of conducting the
  study.
  
• With good preparation, families are willing to
  accept researchers (and foreigners) in their
  home to talk about their adoptions.
  
• Any researcher must collaborate with in-country
  adoption workers in deciphering results.

11
The Child Welfare System Differences

• Family vs. Institutional Care
• Child-Centered vs. Family-Centered

12
COMPARISON OF FAMILY FOSTER CARE TO INSTITUTIONAL
CARE

• FAMILY CARE
• love
• affection
• structure
• 11 attention
• individual focus
• belonging to an extended system of relations
• stimulation through relationships

• INSTITUTIONAL CARE
• acceptance/tolerance
• distance
• routine
• 18-35 attention
• group focus
• belong/identify to the group
• stimulation thru programs

13
Risks to Children from Early Institutionalization

• Health
• Development
• Attachment
• Psychosocial (Emotional and Behavioral)
  Functioning

14
Other in Different Countries
15
Selected Child and Family Demographics
16
Parent-Child Relations
17
Adoption Smoothness
18
Adoption Impact
19
Behavior Problems
20
Across countrieslessons learned about families

• Families were more similar than they were
  different
  
• Children had more similarities than differences
• Families had few service needs that went unmet
• The service system issues were different by
  country
  
• Birth family issues were much more prominent a
  concern in Romania and India than with American
  families.
  
• Family environment is powerful in shaping
  adoption outcomes and mitigating the risk
  children bring to families, but there is still so
  much to learn