Outcomes of adoption for Christian adoptive parents: a qualitative study.

Firmin, Michael W. ; Pugh, Kelley C. ; Markham, Ruth L. 等

Significant research attention recently has been devoted to adoption practices, such as twin studies (Segal, 2012), the significant need for adoptive families (Howell-Moroney, 2013; Smolin, 2012), the psychological stress levels that adoptive parents experience (Belanger, Copeland, & Cheung, 2008), motives for adopting (Howell-Moroney, 2014; Wrobel, 2012), integrating adopted children of different ethnicities than their adoptive parents (Bacchiddu, 2015; Bailey, 2015), the relationship between adoption and altruism (Waters, 2012), religiosity and adoption (Belanger et al., 2008; Wrobel, 2012), the need of adoptees to feel as though they belong (Waters, 2012), and the purpose of adoption (Waters, 2012). This increased attention in research may be due, in part, to recent trends highlighted in the national and social media, particularly in the Western world. Especially following World War II, adoption placements grew exponentially and the 20th century particularly introduced an increased trend in international adoptions (Selman, 2009).

Adoption is not particularly clandestine. It has been practiced throughout recorded history, and in recent years, adoption has grown to be a much more common and open process. Despite the prevalence of adoption in America and other countries, many people may not fully understand the common experiences of adoption: both the joys and the hardships. Significant amounts of research have been dedicated towards quantifiable aspects of adoption, such as overall health of children or other factors stated above. Lesser-known aspects of adoption involve the actual experiences and emotions felt by adoptive parents, which we seek to address in the present study.

Chester (2012) noted that one of the most difficult challenges in adoption can be assimilating the child into the family, particularly if the child is adopted transracially. Such difficulties may be resultant from a difference in cultural norms and practices or it may even simply be due to stubbornness of either party or lack of understanding from both sides. Adoptive parents report experiencing higher than average levels of psychological stress when compared to parents who do not adopt, especially for those who identify as having a "difficult child" or "dysfunctional parent-child interactions" (Lionetti, Pastore, & Barone, 2015). Additionally, adopted children overall tend to experience more life conflicts than do children who have not been adopted (Firmin & Fulmer, 2007), including issues related to developing a sense of identity and assimilating into the family.

Another common challenge in the adoption process is receiving social support from friends, family, or the surrounding community. The need for social support is embedded into the fabric of being human (Feeney & Collins, 2014) and the often-tiresome process of adoption prompts distinct needs among adopting families during the application period. Adoption trends are becoming increasingly internationally oriented, and more special-needs-children are being adopted (Reilly & Platz, 2003). With the unique challenges of international adoption and special-needs adoption, O'Dell, McCall, and Groark (2015) underscore a growing need for support systems, both formal and informal. Further, Chester (2012) reports that since parents who adopt transracially tend to face more difficulties in assimilating their child(ren), these parents are in greater need of surrounding support. Particular needs that families face can be financial, educational, and/or emotional (Bonin, Beecham, Dance, & Farmer, 2014). Many adoptive families report that although families and friends generally are well wishing, the families often do not receive the support that they feel they need (Hartinger-Saunders, Trouteaud, & Johnson, 2015). Farr, Flood, and Grotevant (2016) explored the role that biological siblings play in the long-term experiences of adopted children but overall, research on how adopted children affected the biological children in the family is relatively scant.

Particularly germane to the present study, our review of the literature showed few published studies that specifically addressed the needs and dynamics pertaining to what Christian adoptive parents experience in the process of adoption. Although there seems to be no empirical evidence indicating differing perspectives or outcomes between evangelical and secular parents who adopt, we feel that a close look at the evangelical adoptive parents would be beneficial to the literature for a few reasons. First, in the cultural shift towards adoption as a norm, one of the most prevalent populations who adopt is in fact evangelical Christians. Kinnaman (2013) reported that 5% of practicing American Christians had adopted a child, compared to 2% of all U.S. adults. Similar rates also exist for those who seriously consider adopting or fostering a child. Thus, it may be particularly salient to examine the experiences of evangelical families who adopt, as this unique population makes up a significant portion of adoptive families in America.

Second, as examined in a previous paper (Firmin, Pugh, Markham, Sohn, & Gentry, 2016), some Christians possess motivations for adoption that are unique to their faith (e.g., adopting as a personal form of obedience to Scripture). The distinctive motivations for adoption may result in unique outcomes of the adoption experience. Third, the process of human adoption has significant parallels with the Christian religion. This dynamic may highlight nuances in thought that may not otherwise be present in the secular perspective. And fourth, evangelical faith should not be a peripheral matter that impacts fringe concerns in family life; to the contrary, biblical Christianity should permeate all aspects of family cognition, belief, practice, and planning (Stott, 2014). Therefore, it is reasonable to think that an adopted child raised in a Christian home will have a different experience than an adopted child raised in a secular home, for better or for worse. Similarly, Christian faith can be expected to impact the perspectives of adoptive parents. In that vein, bearing in mind the prevalence of adoption into Christian homes, we designed the present study in order to specifically explore the perceptual frame that Christian families embrace toward adoption practices. Our research question addressed how evangelical parents come to understand and conceptualize the adoption decision-making process. Since qualitative research methods generally answer "how" type questions (Creswell, 2012), we utilized a phenomenological, qualitative study framework in our research method. In conducting the present study, we seek to address the empirical gap in the currently published research literature.

Method

Participants

All but two of the present study's research participants were parents possessing both biological and adopted children. They identified themselves as being evangelical Christians and their adopted children were up to college age. One family who comprised the exception had two adopted children only, and the other had an adopted daughter who is now in her late 20's (no longer living at home). Snowball sampling (Berg, 2012) was utilized in selecting the parents for the present study. We began by contacting parents we knew who had adopted and biological children. In turn, those couples provided referrals to other couples--and those families provided additional referrals. In all cases, we found the parents were eager to participate in the study and openly shared their sentiments with us during the interviews. In almost all cases, we interviewed both the parents of the 21 participating families. The age ranges of the adopted children at the time of the adoption were between five days and 15 years old (mean = 4.5 years old). The number of children adopted by the families ranged from 1 to 7 (mean = 1.7). The length of time that the adoptive children had lived in the home ranged from one month to 21 years. The sample was comprised mostly of caucasian adoptive parents (exceptions = Asian and "other"). Of 35 adopted children, 12 (34%) were Ethiopian, seven (20%) were Chinese, five (14%) were Ugandan, four (11%) were Ukrainian or Russian, one (3%) was Vietnamese, and of those adopted from the U.S., five (14%) were African American, and one (3%) was Caucasian. Of the 35 children, 11 (31%) were girls and 24 (69%) were boys. We assigned pseudonyms in the present article in order to facilitate the reading narrative.

Procedure

A phenomenological research design (Sin, 2010) was utilized in order to accomplish the intended objective of better understanding how Christian families come to understand the adoption process. Semi-structured qualitative interviews (Alvesson, 2011) were utilized in order for parents to feel most free in responding to questions in ways that best related their stories, answered the respective probes, and facilitated families to direct the interviews in paths that best shared their respective perspectives. Motivations, process, assimilation, impact, and faith issues were the primary constructs of interest; not all parents were asked identical questions, since the interviews were semi-structured.

Interviews were tape recorded and later transcribed for analysis. We applied an open-coding data analysis method (Maxwell, 2012), which follows an inductive approach of drawing themes from the transcript data. Constant comparison analysis (Silverman, 2012) was applied to interviews, investigating potential common words, phrases, and concepts among the interviews. Independent line-by-line (Chenail, 2012a) coding occurred initially, and afterwards, the research team met in order to consolidate codes that were common among all the research team members. Following the qualitative research techniques noted by Gay, Mills, and Airasian (2009), we asked key questions, conducted an organizational review, visually displayed the potential results, and employed concept mapping in order to translate the various codes into themes representing the sentiments of most research participants.

Internal validity for our study was bolstered through numerous elements built into our research design. One was regular meetings held among the research team members whereby we linked codes and developed a consensus such that all findings reported in the present article are supported by each research team member. Rapport et al. (2013) indicates that this process strengthens the credibility of qualitative research findings reported in a published journal article. Second, we created a data audit (Rodgers, 2008) that involved generating quotes from the various transcripts that supported the themes we report in the present article. Doing so helps ensure that sufficient breadth and depth exists in the transcript data in order to aptly support the reported research findings. Third, utilizing an expert independent researcher (Flick, 2006) who reviewed each facet of the research process (including the data trail) helped to ensure that the protocol represented expected quality and rigor.

Fourth, member checking (Mero-Jaffe, 2011) involved returning to our research participants and sharing with them the overall findings that we intended to report. They all concurred that what we relate in the present article aptly reflects their respective sentiments. Fifth, the manuscript write-up utilized low inference descriptors (Chenail, 2012b), meaning we included ample examples from the transcript data in order to help the reader see that what we report adequately represents the participants' own perspectives. Sixth, having achieved saturation (Fusch & Ness, 2015) helped strengthen the study's internal validity. As such, we found that adding additional parents to our sample no longer was generating new codes and potential themes. Guest, Bunce, and Johnson (2006), Neuman (2006), Oppong (2013), and other qualitative experts suggest that achieving sample saturation provides confidence that the size was adequate in order to adequately draw conclusions from the data collection.

Establishing internal validity is necessary for concluding that a qualitative study is credible and thorough (Newman, Ridenour, Newman, Smith, & Brown, 2013). The reader must possess confidence that what researchers report aptly represents the perspectives of the individuals who provided the interview data. In sum, great care has been taken in order to ensure sufficient rigor that is expected in quality scholarship (Sin, 2010).

Results

Assimilation into the Family

When asked about their greatest delight throughout the adoption experience, parents often reported that the process of assimilating their adoptive child into their respective families was one of the greatest joys. In a previous study (Firmin et al., 2016), we found that the most common motivations for Christian parents to adopt were either to expand their family or to fulfill some type of perceived spiritual or theological mission, such as caring for orphans. While it would be reasonable to suppose that the accomplishment of these motivations would bring the parents superlative joy, none of the individuals who we interviewed expressed this sentiment. Rather, most explicitly claimed that their greatest joy through the adoption process occurred simply through having their adopted child(ren) as their own--and assimilating them into the family unit, as if the child(ren) was their own biological offspring.

Frequently, parents mentioned how watching their adoptive child formatively change in multiple ways as he/she integrated into the new family unit was a precious and meaningful experience. To the parents we interviewed, seeing this change was indicative of the child being willing to be accepted into the family which their adoptive parents opened up to them. As an example, one father, Brent, said: "When you look at these kids, and see the incredible change in them, from when you come home--whether it's physical changes--or their ability to relate to the family--or their ability to resolve conflict--and you see the spiritual growth, and you see them for the first time reading the gospel and growing ... that's so rewarding." Evelyn similarly related regarding her son that she particularly saw changes in his "social ability and self-control ... and hearing [him] say 'I love you.'"

A few parents shared stories of how their adoptive children have begun to blossom because of their new life-position and specifically shared ways in which the children have started becoming more like their new families. For instance, Mike said: "The greatest joy is every time I see [our adopted son] do something that I know aligns more with our family." He proceeded to give an example of his son, before he had been officially adopted out of foster care: "He was on a soccer team, and there was a question of whether or not he wanted to get his name on the back of the shirt or not, and him saying he wanted to get [his new family's last name] on the back. He wound up saying that." Mike spoke tenderly of the moment and recognized this incident as being a milestone for his son to be truly assimilated into the family. These changes of assimilation, including proverbial "little things," such as the name on a jersey, were some of the greatest blessings expressed by the adoptive parents.

Another specific way in which adoptive children assimilated into the family was in their bonding with the biological children. Parents said that they worked diligently in order to help facilitate a transition that would be as smooth as possible (i.e., as humanly realistic and feasible), and expressed the thought that this sibling bonding was one of the more important aspects of true familial assimilation. As an example, Tonya, speaking about her newly adopted daughter, said: I love seeing [her] with our children ... it just gives me a peace to know that she's going to be okay, she's going to grow up to love her siblings, going to be best friends with her 'twin' two-year-old brother ... I see a really beautiful friendship between them all starting.

This connecting-sentiment was echoed by most other families, particularly those adopting children who were similar in age to their biological children.

An important note regarding this particular reported theme pertains to accompanying hardships involved with the adoption process. Parents we interviewed said that the overall assimilation dynamic was a process that took or continues to take years for each of these children and their new families. Regarding this point, one parent reflected: "People think, 'okay, it's been two years,' and ... the assumption is after the newness wears off: 'Oh! You guys are done.' But you're never really done. It's a journey." Many parents explained that it was easy to become frustrated or discouraged during times when their child seemed to revert back to previous behavior; specified "patience" was said to be a key factor in showing biblical love toward their adopted child, perhaps more so than their biological children. One mother, Sarah, illustrated this point when she expressed how it hurt her when her son (who she loved) would be reluctant to show his affection: "I would say we had a more difficult time--not us bonding to him, but him bonding to us.... We kind of had to con him into giving us a hug and stuff like that. Each year you can see progress and I'd say now he's totally bonded ... but it was [discouraging]."

Despite the shortcomings, the overwhelming response from parents was that the evident joy of assimilation, and even just simply having their adopted child as daily parts of their own respective homes, far outweighed any heartache or discouragement. One mother spoke of "the gift of having [our son] ... we have certainly gained so much more out of adopting [him] than he's probably gained out of us being his parents." Another family similarly said: "I think [our son] has added so much to our family. Just his background and personality--who he is--he has added so much." One mother expressed her delight in what might seem typical of a biological child-parent relationship, but the dynamic reportedly held special significance, having come from her adopted son: One day our son was having a really bad day, he was having conflict--it was just one of those days--I asked him to do something and he did the opposite. And so we're exhausted, you know. But he's lying down, and we're just thinking 'this is the worst,' but he pops his little head up and says 'I love you, mom.' And I'm like, 'seriously?! After the day we had?!' But to hear him say that is very rewarding. And even just him calling us dad or mom.

Difference, But No Difference

A significant portion of the participants expressed that they related to their adopted child in ways that were different, yet somehow not different, from how they related to their respective biological children. In particular, the parents said relating to the adopted child, understanding him/her fully, and results of not sharing the same genes [or looking like them] were domains where they experienced differences between the adopted and non-adopted children. Parents in our study made various references to the idea that adopted children were not their [so-called] "flesh and blood;" this dynamic allegedly resulted in differences in how they interacted with their adopted child. Richard, for example, after contemplating God's expansive love, said the following: [My adopted children] really have done nothing at all to deserve us loving them. I felt that way with my own [biological] kids some (chuckles), but they are my own flesh and blood. So it's a little bit different ... that I feel like well (laughs, searches for words) --it's like, you know, I helped create them. So there's a connection there. But with [my adopted sons], they were across the world. They've done nothing at all to deserve my love. Or you know, to warrant my love. So sort of that ... And yet I do love them as my children.

In the statement, Richard expressed that there was a difference in connection, and yet he could still relate to his adopted sons as his own children. The boundary of "flesh and blood" was not indicative of a boundary of his love for them.

We suspect that a component of this "difference" that parents expressed came from the maternal bond between a mother and her child. Naturally, there is a strong bond between a mother and her biological child that begins to develop during the pregnancy and continues to be strengthened following birth. A handful of mothers felt that there was no difference such as one mom who said: "It was just like bringing a kid home from the hospital with us ... When we came through the airport terminal, it felt like we were leaving the hospital. It honestly felt like the same thing." However, this perspective was the exception compared to most parents in our study; most of the mothers said that bonding with their adopted child was different from the experiences with their respective biological children. Linda illustrated: There is a natural love with being the mother, giving birth, and wiping them as babies, and there's a reason why you breastfeed and cuddle. It's that whole bonding and with the other kid, we didn't have that. But it's not like they walk into your home and the love that you have is the same or the same level at the beginning at all and it takes time and that's what's hard.

Although Richard, quoted above, conveyed having a sense of the nuanced difference in relating to his children--it seems that, overall, fathers may not have experienced this "difference" as significantly as the mothers in our study experienced. One father said, "I don't really know if I necessarily feel differently towards them. Honestly, I mean I feel like they're my kids," while his wife, referencing the experiences of her husband, stated: "I think for me, it's just a little bit different. You know, having carried [my two biological children], and delivering them; I think that automatically puts you at a different bonding level than with children that you just pick up and you bring into your home."

Along another vein, several parents explained that they treated their biological children differently from their adopted children, but that dynamic was due to the fact that each child needs to be related to differently. One mother said that she learned this principle through counseling: "Love will look different through all of our kids ... . And that's okay." Another mom, Lauren, echoed this concept when she said: "All four of my children are completely different, and they all have different needs, they all have different ways they like to be loved, so whether they are adopted or not, we do interact with our children all differently, based on how God views them, not based on how they came into our family."

While a significant portion of the parents we interviewed claimed that there was at least some semblance of differences in the way they related with their adopted and biological children, a handful of parents were adamant that there was absolutely no difference in the way they related with their biological child. In other words, their adopted child was just like their biological children. Time may have played a moderating role in this regard. For example, Sheila, when asked whether or not there was a difference in the way she related with her adopted son, stated: "No. In the beginning I would say it was different, but I remember praying that God would give me a love for him that was the same." Still, some parents claimed that their love for their child was completely natural and had never at any point been any different. Derek, a father of two biological children and two adopted children, advocated:

We've had weird comments, just like uninformed people who have [said things] like 'oh, you surely can't love them the same?' I hold my tongue usually, and they just don't understand. They just don't understand what biblical love is, and the love that we get from Christ, and therefore have for others, and yeah, it goes across, biology does not stop that, that's for sure.

Almost every single one of the parents who we interviewed explicitly stated that they "love [their adopted child] the same." The variance existed in how the parents reportedly related to or viewed their adopted child.

Supportive, but Lack of Understanding

Most parents told us that they received support, especially initially, from their extended family, friends, and the local community. In particular, the church was often cited as a key point of support and encouragement. Ellen, for example, was delighted to explain that she not only received support from her church, but that their adoption process affected members of her church family: "Our church was great, they really embraced it, and it was neat how God was able to use our story to encourage other people to do the same." While support was typically said to be strong, many of the participants felt that few of their supporters fully understood what they were experiencing as adoptive parents. Again, a significant mitigating factor related to this dynamic was time. Church members initially would engage in activities such as setting up meal trains during the first couple weeks. Additionally, families would call and ask how the new parents were doing, and friends would be understanding of the new parents' emotional needs. In time, however, the understanding and social support allegedly would eventually fade. One family referred to this phenomenon as the "honeymoon phase." After the first few months to a year, outsiders began to see the adopted child as normal for their family and would assume the assimilation was complete. Parents told us that other people simply did not understand why the child and family were still struggling with the integration, not realizing it is an ongoing (rather than punctiliar) process, a journey of years or even a lifetime. One parent said of his local church community: "They [initially] supported us, we did some fundraising, they were very supportive of our journey, and were always asking what else they could do ... But after the first three or four months ... then it just becomes the norm." Carl similarly shared: "The assumption is after the newness wears off: 'Oh! You guys are done.' But you're never really done. It's a journey."

The exception to this lack of understanding from initial supporters was in the case of friends or family who had previous experiences with adoption or who were currently in a similar situation, integrating their own adopted child. For example, many parents mentioned the special connection they still had with the other adoptive families with whom they had traveled to China or Uganda when picking up their new children. Additionally, new friendships were also formed with other adoptive families. Jennifer, after regretfully explaining that they lost some friends after their very difficult adoption process, followed-up by stating: We had some friends who had adopted other kids who had a struggle and I think we became very close to them because of the similar circumstances. They were the ones that would call and check in and that I would relate to. There was no one else really to cry to or assimilate to.

Lessons Learned

When asked what they had learned from the adoption experience, both practically and spiritually, the parents we interviewed had much to say. While there were some practical lessons mentioned, most of the lessons they shared revolved around their own spiritual growth in some way or the parallels between spiritual adoption and human adoption becoming more concrete.

Increased grace. Some of the couples said that their adoption experience had grown them into being more patient, graceful people. This grace was extended to their children as well as others. For example, one parent said the adoption process "taught us compassion and empathy, and it's opened our eyes a lot." Another shared that "having [my adopted boys] here has made me try to be a little more patient and a little more understanding as a parent ... adoption just made me realize I'm adopted into God's family as well and He opens and forgives and patiently loves. And how well do I do that with my own adopted kids?"

Unconditional love. One of the most often recurring lessons related to the true meaning of the unconditional love that God shows to His children and how that love had been demonstrated in their lives through their adoption experience. This concept was particularly mentioned in the context of the parents loving their adopted children even though their children sometimes were struggling to love them back. Many voiced how their adopted child had never been loved unconditionally and did not know how to love someone else. Richard spoke about God's unconditional love in this way: "With [my two adopted sons], they were across the world. They had done nothing at all to deserve my love. And yet I do love them as my children. And God also ... is capable of loving us even though we don't really deserve it or do anything." Another parent added: I think being a believer really makes a difference because you truly understand how to love someone unconditionally who doesn't know how to love you back ... Adopting an older child is very hard in that sense, but then you start to reflect, "You know, God loves me, even though I didn't love him," and it is really raw in that sense.

Sarah drew the connection concisely: "God has chosen to love me despite all of my issues. And so even before we brought [our son] home, we chose to love him regardless of his issues."

General sanctification. Many parents spoke to the different ways in which God had used the adoption process in order to sanctify them and grow them more into His image. Through their experience when deciding whether or not to adopt, completing all the paperwork, waiting to be able to pick up their child, and integrating him/her into the family, these couples found that "adoption refines you" and that "the Lord works in both our and our children's hearts through the process."

One father told us, "If the Lord has called you to do this, then you can't question when it gets hard. It may be hard and it may stink, but He has a sanctifying work in that ... You have to remember the Lord is working in your kids' lives ... you are being sanctified ... it is a heart issue." Reportedly, sometimes the reasons for the "roadblocks" of the adoption process were discovered later, and sometimes they were not; but time and again these parents testified that the challenges had matured their faith. Kathleen summed up the principle in this way: "I think this adoption process has grown me a lot as a person, as a mom, and just as a child of God on so many levels."

Concrete understanding. Finally, a subcategory of this theme that surfaced in almost every interview was that God was using the human adoption process in order to give these parents a much more concrete picture of spiritual adoption. Parents related how concepts they had struggled to understand or had found somewhat theoretical were now more clear and comprehensible in a new and amazing way. As an example, Jeremy, reflecting on his former thoughts that had been transformed by the process of adoption, stated: Before, it was a picking up your cross, adoption ... all of those things were kind of theoretical. I could quote you Scriptures, I could talk about what it meant, I could preach a sermon on it. But, after you've lived it and you've felt it, you realize what [all of it] means ...

Others described this further revelation as "getting to see it in high definition rather than just black and white." Some of these previously-abstract adoption constructs included the meaning of sacrifice, purification or sanctification, the idea of sonship and inheritance, assimilation into God's family, the legal process of adoption, unconditional love, and God's relentless pursuit of us and our affection. Greg summed: "Christ's sacrifice allows us to become sons, and that parallel becomes much more real and impactful when you actually go to such great lengths to adopt a child from across the world. in the same way, the Lord searches after us even more so, and it's a beautiful parallel." Jane said her experience with adoption "demonstrates what I know to be true ... in faith, for us to be grafted into God's family." Many parents expressed joy at seeing a picture of the spiritual reality of adoption running around their house every day as a reminder.

An increased understanding of the legal process of adoption, in particular, was a construct noted by multiple parents. The Scriptures contain language related to adoption, sonship, and inheritance. One father, Brent, suggested that individuals who have not gone through similar legal transactions cannot appreciate fully these passages of Scripture in a theological sense as fully as parents who have done so. He stated his sentiments as follows:

When you walk through the legal process, when you take on the challenge and the permanency of it, when there are judges and people are looking at you like, "You understand that you are responsible for this child as though he is your own and there is nothing you can do to undo this decision you're about to make?" ... [because of my experience], the biblical language of adoption has become much more concrete for me.

Significance of Names

Numerous families in our study referenced the "debate" over whether or not to change a child's name; some families deliberately changed the child's original name and others did not. The parents who chose to keep the name of the child often cited that there was no real reason to trigger a name change, or even that it might be more negative than beneficial. For example, one adopted father said: "We liked their names and we felt like they had already been through so much, that another name, sort of a quasi-identity, wasn't in their best interest." In many cases where the child's name remained the same, the adopted child was older than seven.

In families where the adopted child was an infant or a younger age (although sometimes older, as late as a 12 year old), it was common to change the name of the child. When this part of the interview arose, a noticeable change was present in the tone of the adopted parents; they were visibly or audibly excited to discuss the name of their child and what the name meant. In these cases, the parents had bequeathed their child with a name possessing rich meaning in light of the child's story. For example, one family explained: "And so, we researched the meaning of the original name and [found out] it was 'God will hear.' I was just thinking about the connection to his birth mom crying out for someone to help. And so to go from [the meaning of] 'God hears' to [a name that has the meaning of] 'God heard,'--we liked being able to keep that meaning."

Another family explained how they felt a connection to their daughter before they adopted her because of the special meaning of her original name. The parents recounted the story of how they had once tried to adopt domestically, and were able to take home a baby girl named Hope. Five days after the adoption, the birth mother asked for her daughter back, leaving the parents brokenhearted. When pursuing international adoption from Uganda, they were matched for a particular girl. The husband recounted: "[My wife] called and said 'there's a little girl in Uganda, and she has special needs, but before you say anything, you need to hear what her name is ...' Her name was given by the orphanage and it was [the Ugandan name] meaning hope."

Another family explained how their seven-year-old daughter's original name meant "darkness," and how they decided to change her name to mean "bright." They also assigned a name to their nine-year-old son, having the meaning of "peace," because they prayed that he would grow up to be that kind of man. The father explained his reasoning for giving his children new names: "When God was going to do something new with someone, He changed their name. So I liked the idea of changing their name, not because I didn't like their name, but because I saw how God wanted to express what He did for the people who he changed." In this way, the significance of names somewhat served as a type of "rite of passage" into adoption into the family. While parents did not want to ignore the history of their child, the concept of a new name possessing a rich meaning gave the child a tangible sense of what this new life meant for them.

Adoption Legacy

The last common theme identified from our interviews was one which we reference with the phrase, "adoption legacy." Repeatedly, parents shared stories of the passion and "heart for adoption" that they believe was being passed down to the next generation (i.e., to their biological children) as a result of the adoption process. This adoption legacy expressed itself in four general ways in this study. First, in many families, the parents noted how much their biological children had welcomed the adopted child into the family. Reportedly, these children enthusiastically welcomed their new siblings, evidently bonded quickly with them, took special, motherly care of them, and in many ways displayed their own "heart for adoption." Some, to their parent's delight, talked about their new brother or sister as the "best thing that has ever happened," and many asked their parents when they were going to adopt again. Two examples demonstrate this idea very well. One mother recalled: My son, who is 18, shared a room with [our two-year-old adopted son], so we were waiting to see how long it would take him to get used to it and start hating it. But one thing we learned and were not expecting was that they would have so much joy ... My older kids really grabbed him in as part of the family and they don't think twice about it.

Amy similarly shared, [Our biological daughter] is very much a little mom. I think she always wants to help get [her new little siblings] dressed. [Our adopted son] is very immature emotionally, so I think he never really had that skin to skin contact and snuggling. And [our daughter] will just sit there and hold him and snuggle.

A second means by which the adoption legacy expressed itself was through the biological children expressing a desire to adopt children themselves one day. Many parents speculated that their children would likely adopt when they were older. For example, one parent stated: "I would be very surprised if our boys did not at least consider adoption when they begin families ... They have a heart for adoption and they have a heart for children coming from hard places." In other cases, the children had explicitly voiced a desire to adopt someday. One mother shared: "I definitely without a doubt know our [biological] son has a really deep understanding of orphan care ... [he] has said things like 'I really hope my future wife will want to adopt. And I really want to take care of an orphan when I'm older.'"

This expression of adoption legacy was perhaps most profound in the non-verbal communication that the parents conveyed to the interviewers. When parents spoke about their own children wanting to adopt some day, there was a notable tone of pride and thankfulness. Some parents even began to tear at the prospect. Sometimes we identified the adoption legacy more generally, through children's reported heart for helping anyone in need, not just orphans. In speaking about their biological children, one family who had adopted a special-needs daughter told us: They have developed such compassion and empathy towards people with physical and mental developmental disabilities. They recently talked about how they used to be frightened to be around people that used to be so different than them, or maybe couldn't talk or couldn't walk, but now they actually gravitate towards those individuals.

In one case, the adopted daughter herself was expressing this desire to help others. Her mother, Theresa, shared: "One of the joys I have had recently with [my daughter] as she's moving into adulthood is to see what I think are really healthy signs of being interested in helping others who are in a situation where either they're orphans or need assistance."

Finally, in multiple cases the parents being interviewed were themselves individuals who had grownup with a heart for adoption since it had been kindled by their own family's experience with adoption. One woman indicated: "I came from a family of 10 adopted children, so my husband and I were always open to it." Another was on the third generation of the adoption legacy. She shared: "My mom had actually been adopted. and then my mom domestically adopted a little girl. Then [when we couldn't get pregnant] ... I remember telling [my husband] that we were going to adopt. we need to adopt." The theme of adoption legacy was one always accompanied with a sentimental tone. The parents seemed hopeful that the often difficult process of adoption genuinely was making a difference, not only in the lives of their adopted children, but in their own lives and in the lives of their biological children.

Discussion

The interviews given by the adoptive parents proved to be rather poignant. As many of the participants mentioned, adoption is a beautiful process, but it is invariably the result of something tragic: the loss of a family of origin. In this way, modern American adoption is significantly different from a Christian's spiritual adoption; God the Father provides a true home for the wandering soul, while an earthly adopted family is only found after losing one's own family. All in all, however, the process of earthly adoption in many ways reflects spiritual adoption, such as the joy of inclusion into a new family, unconditional love, the bestowal of a new name, and an evangelistic attitude towards adoption.

The joy that parents expressed as their adopted child became assimilated into the new family is reminiscent of how God delights in bringing his wayward children back into his fold, much like the father rejoiced over the return of his prodigal son (Luke 15). Parents expressed their challenges, sometimes even anguish, due to their adoptive child's seemingly slow assimilation into the family. This finding in the present study is consistent with results noted in previously published research literature regarding adoption. Assimilation into the family can be one of the greatest challenges to successful adoption; the finding noted in the present study--that assimilation into the family is also one of the greatest joys--brings a new dynamic to this construct.

The commonly expressed sentiment that families felt emotionally supported, but also reportedly did not feel as though they receive the longer-term full support they needed, reflects a proposition for expanding support systems to families who are adopting (O'Dell et al., 2015). The adage "it takes a village to raise a child" has a kernel of truth regarding the case of adopted children. The need for social support in rearing an adoptive child goes far beyond the initial months of acclimation.

One of the more nuanced and controversial themes that arose in the present study was that adoptive parents saw a "difference, yet no difference" in their adopted versus biological children. While initially this phrase may seem like an impossible conundrum, it appears that the two sentiments can, in fact, coexist. In the present article's literature review, we noted that adoption agencies cite one of the most common fears indicated by potential adoptive parents as loving their adopted child in the same way as their biological child. Data from the present research study both supports and contests this statement. It is true that many parents do feel as though they can love their adopted child the same way that they love their biological children. However, this dynamic was said to have occurred most often after a period of time and events leading to assimilation into the new family. Furthermore, evidence exists that mothers do share a special bond with the children they carry in their womb (Winston & Chicot, 2016). While these biological ties may be surpassed by a deep, abiding love for the adopted child, they still present obstacles to achieving a potential desired result of having the "same" love.

The significance of names that arose in interviews demonstrates noted findings in previously published literature: there seems to be a heightened sense of "parental investment" when a child is adopted (Evans, 1990). Although none of the adopted parents, to our knowledge, named their child because of a namesake, they spent considerable time and energy choosing a name that possessed meaningful significance, either in etymology or meaning. An unusual amount of attention was given to the surrounding circumstances of the adopted child, whereas with biological children, the decision to name the child seemed to be more based on personal preference than meaning. The idea of possessing a new name is also evocative of the Christian idea that God the Father gives His children a "new name" when they are adopted into the family of God (Revelation 2:17). We also see biblical accounts of God changing the names of some believers, such as Abram to Abraham, Jacob to Israel, Cephas to Peter, and Saul to Paul.

The present study contributed to the empirical literature regarding the experience of Christian adoptive parents. One significant theme that emerged was "lessons learned" in the adoptive process. The Christian adoptive parents we interviewed expressed that their greatest lessons learned were not simply "how to be a better parent" or "how to navigate government forms." Rather, the lessons they learned were very directly related to their faith. Additionally, an enhanced understanding regarding how adopted children affected the perspectives of biological children was also garnered, as we discovered in the theme of "adoption legacy."

We conclude that what the parents in our study expressed is reflective of spiritual adoption. These adoptive parents reportedly did not require anything from their adopted children but rather desired to enjoy a close relationship, wishing for their child to grow in Christian faith. Similarly, God does not "obtain" anything from having adopted us into his spiritual family. Rather, He desires to have a meaningful relationship with us and hopes that we will grow in our faith in Him. The real-life examples of the Christian parents we interviewed stand as cogent reminders of spiritual truths for all believers.

Since this study did not examine the outcomes of adoption of secular adoptive parents, no empirical evidence can assert that the outcomes of adoption would be fundamentally different between secular families and Christian families. Indeed, we suspect that secular families would express similar underlying joys, difficulties, and lessons as a result of the adoption process. For example, we expect that non-Christian adoptive parents also take delight at the assimilation of their child into the family, and also are discouraged by lack of support from neighbors.

Despite these likely similarities, we also have reason to believe that, because of a Christian's belief in theological adoption, human adoption is subsequently approached in a manner that is qualitatively different (i.e., had the theological belief not been present). The adoptive parents who we interviewed expressed their experiences by frequently alluding to, if not even explicitly referencing, Scripture and Christian principles. By and large, these Christian parents seemed to approach human adoption from an already existing and rich conceptualization of adoption; for these Christian parents, human adoption was not only a way to care for the oppressed and hurting, but was also a way to represent what had occurred spiritually.

Since the prevalence of adoption into evangelical families is particularly high, examining the outcomes of adoption in Christian families may shed light on what many adoptive parents frequently experience. For some, it may be difficult to conceptualize what it would be like to suddenly accept an "outsider" as an integral part of a family unit. Toward this end, we hope this study may illuminate these perceptions and experiences.

Limitations and Future Research

Our study was based on a self-selected sample of adoptive parents who we either personally knew or to whom we were referred. This protocol was helpful, since it increased homogeneity of sample, which is a desirable element for qualitative research (Seidman, 2013). At the same time, however, it also increased similarities between families due to the nature of social circles. Had there been a random sample of Christian adoptive parents across America, saturation may not have been reached as quickly. Furthermore, adoptive parents were often interviewed together. The dynamic may have resulted in some spouses tending to focus on the same subjects and "mirror" one another in their attitudes and focal points of discussion. We did not have occasion to generate focus groups among the respective adoptive parents, but we believe this protocol might potentially yield valuable qualitative research data.

We believe that a few particular themes found in the present study possess special merit for future investigations, one of which is the significance of names. Parents were extremely enthusiastic in explaining their rationale for names, and we suspect that in many or most situations, the naming of adopted children may bear more weight than even the naming of biological children. Another theme for potential further investigation is the construct of "no difference, and yet a difference." This sentiment is reflected in the theological understanding of adoption since, although God the Father loves both Jews and Gentiles in the same way and nourishes them from the same "vine," there is still a nuance between the two parties. When asked regarding whether parents loved their adopted children with the same love as their biological children, parents often spoke of how there was a difference, but they seemingly could not adequately articulate the difference. Further exploring the nuances of this theme may be beneficial for our understanding and to adoptive parents who experience this conflicting emotion. Also, future research comparing how non-Christian and Christian parents frame the construct of adoption (as well as how they relate to their respective children) would be interesting. And finally, comparing the results from the present study with the results from a sample of Christian ethnic and/or racial minority parents would show both empirical promise and Christian interest.

References

Alvesson, M. (2011). Interpreting interviews. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Bacchiddu, G. (2015). 'Living at the margins of difference': Transnational and transracial adoption and the reformulation of the American family and of its members' assumptions. Social Anthropology, 23, 510-514.

Bailey, S. J. (2015). Transnational adoption challenges: Through the eyes of Eastern European youth. Adoption Quarterly, 18, 85-107.

Belanger, K., Copeland, S., & Cheung, M. (2008). The role of faith in adoption: Achieving positive adoption outcomes for African American children. Child Welfare: Journal of Policy, Practice, and Program, 87, 99-123.

Berg, B. (2012). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Bonin, E., Beecham, J., Dance, C., & Farmer, E. (2014). Support for adoption placements: The first six months. British Journal of Social Work, 44, 1508-1525.

Chenail, R. J. (2012a). Conducting qualitative data analysis: Reading line-by-line, but analyzing by meaningful qualitative units. The Qualitative Report, 17, 266-269.

Chenail, R. J. (2012b). Conducting qualitative data analysis: Managing dynamic tensions within. The Qualitative Report, 17, 1-6.

Chester, C. E. (2012). Transracial adoptive family development: The implications for adoption and contextual factors on social support, parenting self-efficacy and cultural socialization. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA.

Creswell, J. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Evans, R.M. (1990). The relationship between parental input and investment. Animal Behaviour 39, 797-798.

Farr, R. H., Flood, M. E., & Grotevant, H. D. (2016). The role of siblings in adoption outcomes and experiences from adolescence to emerging adulthood. Journal of Family Psychology, 30, 386-396.

Feeney, B., & Collins, N. (2014). A new look at social support: A theoretical perspective on thriving through relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 19, 113-147.

Firmin, M., & Fulmer, C. (2007). Perspective on adoptive children experiencing more conflicts. Marriage & Family: A Christian Journal, 7, 269-278.

Firmin, M., Pugh, K. C., Markham, R., Sohn, V., & Gentry, E. (2016, November). Perspectives regarding motivations for adoption by Christian adoptive parents: A qualitative study. Poster session presented at the 66th Annual North American Association of Christians in Social Work, Cincinnati, Ohio.

Flick, V. (2006). An introduction to qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Fusch, P., & Ness, L. (2015). Are we there yet? Data saturation in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report, 20, 1408-1416.

Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. (2009). Educational research (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18, 59-82.

Hartinger-Saunders, R., Trouteaud, A., & Johnson, J. (2015). The effects of postadoption service need and use on child and adoptive parent outcomes. Journal of Social Service Research, 41, 75-92.

Howell-Moroney, M. (2013). Faith-based partnerships and foster parent satisfaction. Journal of Health & Human Services Administration, 36, 228-251.

Howell-Moroney, M. (2014). The empirical ties between religious motivation and altruism in foster parents: Implications for faith-based initiatives in foster care and adoption. Religions, 5, 720-737.

Johnson, J. L., McAndrew, F. T., & Harris, P. B. (1991). Sociobiology and the naming of adopted and natural children. Ethology & Sociobiology, 12, 365-375.

Kinnaman, D. (2013, November 4). Five things you need to know about adoption--Barna group. Barna Group. Retrieved from http://wwwbarna.com/research/ 5-things-you-need-to-know-about-adoption/#.

Lionetti, F., Pastore, M., & Barone, L. (2015). Parenting stress: The roles of attachment states of mind and parenting alliance in the context of adoption. Parenting: Science and Practice, 15, 75-91.

Maxwell, J. A. (2012). Qualitative research design (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, cA: Sage.

Mero-Jaffe, I. (2011). 'Is that what I said?' Interview transcript approval by participants: An aspect of ethics in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 10, 231-247.

Neuman, W. L. (2006). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Newman, I., Ridenour, c. S., Newman, c., Smith, S., & Brown, R. C. (2013). Detecting low incidents effects: The value of mixed methods. Midwestern Educational Researcher, 25, 31-46.

O'Dell, K. E., McCall, R. B., & Groark, C. J. (2015). Supporting families throughout the international special needs adoption process. Children and Youth Services Review, 59, 161-170.

Oppong, S. H. (2013). The problem of sampling in qualitative research. Asian Journal of Management Sciences and Education, 2, 202-210.

Rapport, F., Storey, M., Porter, A., Snooks, H., Jones, K., Peconi, J., .Russell, I. (2013). Qualitative research within trials: Developing a standard operating procedure for a clinical trials unit. Trials, 14, 1-8.

Reilly, T., & Platz, L. (2003). Characteristics and challenges of families who adopt children with special needs: An empirical study. Children and Youth Services Review, 25, 781-803.

Rodgers, B. (2008). Audit trail. In L. Given (Ed.), The Sage encyclopedia of qualitative research methods (Vol. 1; pp. 43-44). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Segal, N. L. (2012). Born together--reared apart: The landmark Minnesota twin study. Cambridge: Harvard university Press.

Seidman, I. (2013). Interviewing as qualitative research (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Selman, P. (2009). The movement of children for international adoption: Developments and trends in receiving states and states of origin, 1998-2004. In D. Marre, L. Briggs, D. Marre, & L. Briggs (Eds.), International adoption: Global inequalities and the circulation of children (pp. 32-51). New York, NY: New York University Press.

Silverman, D. (2012). Interpreting qualitative data (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Sin, S. (2010). Considerations of quality in phenomenographic research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 9, 305-319.

Smolin, D. M. (2012). Of orphans and adoption, parents and the poor, exploitation and rescue: A scriptural and theological critique of the evangelical Christian adoption and orphan care movement. Journal of Christian Legal Thought, 2, 6-8.

Stott, J. (2014). Balanced Christianity (expanded ed.). Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press.

Waters, B. (2012). Christian adoption? Dialog: A Journal of Theology, 51, 305-312.

Winston, R., & Chicot, R. (2016). The importance of early bonding on the long-term mental health and resilience of children. London Journal of Primary Care, 8, 12-14.

Wrobel, G. M. (2012). Understanding the adoptive family within the context of Christian hospitality. Dialog: A Journal of Theology, 51, 313-322.

Michael W. Firmin

Cedarville University

Ruth L. Markham

Cedarville University

Emily N. Gentry

Cedarville University

Valerie A. Sohn

Grace College

Kelley C. Pugh

East Tennessee State University

Michael W. Firmin (Ph.D. from Syracuse University) is Professor of Psychology at Cedarville University in Cedarville, Ohio and is editor of the Journal of Ethnographic & Qualitative Research (wwwjeqr.org). Dr. Firmin has published over 120 articles in peer-reviewed journals and is Director of the national Ethnographic & Qualitative Research Conference (wwweqrc.net), now in its 29th annual year.

Kelley C. Pugh (B.A. from Cedarville University) is a Ph.D. student in the clinical psychology program at East Tennessee State University in Johnson City, Tennessee.

Ruth Lowrie Markham (Ed.D. from Ball State University) is Associate Professor of Psychology at Cedarville University in Cedarville, Ohio. She is a school psychologist, having served in public and Christian school settings for over 20 years.

Valerie A. Sohn (B.A. from Cedarville University) is a master's student in the counseling program at Grace College in Winona Lake, Indiana.

Emily N. Gentry is a senior psychology major at Cedarville University in Cedarville, Ohio.

Correspondence regarding this article should be addressed to Michael W. Firmin, Ph.D., Professor of Psychology, Cedarville University, 251 N. Main Street, Cedarville, OH 45314; firmin@cedarville.edu