adoption of African American children by whites: A renewed conflict, The

ABSTRACT: During the turbulent 1960s and the civil-rights movement, African Americans called for the reexamination of major institutional policies. One of the policy changes demanded by African American social workers was the cessation of Whites adopting African American children. The view of the fledgling Association of Black Social Workers was that such practices would result in cultural genocide. This view influenced policy as family-court judges and child advocates pursued same-race adoption with respect to African American children. Some child advocates called the policy of excluding Whites from adopting African American children imprudent and discriminatory, and in the 1980s, judges began to rule in favor of White parents who wanted to adopt Black children. Legislation was introduced and signed into law that makes it illegal for states or agencies receiving federal funding to consider race in the adoption of children. This shift in policy has enraged many African American social workers and resulted in major disagreements between them and individuals who advocate for transracial adoptions. The author explores the arguments of each side and suggests policy recommendations.

THE UNITED STATES JUDICIAL SYSTEM permitted the adoption of African American children by Whites as early as 1948 (Ladner, 1977). As White families continued to adopt African American children, Black child advocates, such as the National Association of Black Social Workers (NABSW), contended that these placements were harmful to the children and the African American community. In 1968, approximately 733 transracial adoptions took place, but by 1971 that number more than tripled to 2,574 (Bartholet, 1991). In 1972, the NABSW aggressively opposed the adoption of African American children by Whites; as a resuit, the number of White families adopting African American children dropped precipitously (Day, 1979). The number of minority children adopted by White families dropped to 1,091 by 1973 and to 747 in 1974 (Auld, 1993).

This policy has been challenged on several fronts. First, White researchers have produced numerous studies reflecting the view that African American children were not harmed as a result of their adoption by White parents (Altstein & Simon, 1977, 1992; Grow & Shapiro, 1974). Second, a series of court decisions have supported transracial placement (Kramer v. Kramer, 1980; Palmore v. Sidoti, 1984). Third, the Multiethnic Placement Act,

introduced by former Senator Howard Metzenbaum (D-OH), was passed by the 103rd Congress and signed into law by President Clinton. The law prohibits consideration of race in placing children for adoption.

Background

The Children's Defense Fund (1992) determined that approximately 500,000 children are currently without permanent homes and in the child-placement system in the United States. If current trends continue, the number of children nationwide in need of a permanent home may reach 900,000 by the year 2000 (Children's Defense Fund, 1992). Children of color are disproportionately represented among the population of children in the child-placement system. African American children represent approximately 38% of this population (National Committee for Adoption, 1989).

Various factors contributed to the increase of children requiring out-of-home care. First, the medical profession's identification of the battered-child syndrome in the early 1960s and subsequent passage of mandatory child-abuse reporting laws increased the number of children eligible for placement. After children were removed from their homes and placed in foster care, little systematic review and follow-up on the family's status occurred. Children who were removed from their homes, supposedly on a temporary basis, often remained in care for years (Day, 1979; Howard, 1984). The number of children who were relinquished for adoption or temporarily removed from their homes increased to an extent disproportionate to the number of foster homes available for placement. This was particularly true for African American children, as child-welfare agencies did little to recruit African American foster parents (Billingsley, 1968; Day, 1979).

With the legalization of abortion in the 1970s, women who experienced an unwanted pregnancy could choose abortion as an alternative to childbirth and relinquishment. Adoption agencies reported serving fewer White mothers interested in relinquishment. As fewer White children became available for adoption, agencies increasingly focused their resources on the placement of African American children (Day, 1979; McRoy, 1994).

Problems associated with the child-placement system increased, as did the number of children in out-of-home care. In an attempt to remedy these problems, the U.S. Congress passed the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980 (PL. 96-272). The law stipulated that permanency planning--written plans aimed at developing a course of action to return a child to his or her biological family, facilitate relinquishment by parents, or terminate parental rights so that a child can be placed in a permanent home--become a national priority. The act also established a nationwide program to subsidize the permanent placement of children at risk. The at-risk population includes racial and ethnic minorities, sibling groups, older children, and children with handicapping conditions (Legislative History, 1980).

Insufficient funding, inadequate monitoring, and poor enforcement limited the effectiveness of the Adoption Assistance Act. The permanency-planning movement in child welfare has not improved continuity of care, particularly for children of color (Close, 1983; Hogan & Siu, 1988). Close (1983) conducted research based on a comprehensive cross-sectional national survey of workers in the child-welfare system that yielded data from case records and reports from workers. The findings tended to support arguments that the child-welfare system failed many children, particularly children of color. African American and Hispanic children were denied equal access to emergency services, and their parents were viewed as less likely to benefit from family-preservation services and were therefore the least likely to receive services aimed at keeping families intact. Service plans for children of color were found to be less comprehensive than those for other children.

Despite resources authorized by the federal government and the states to address the problems of the child-placement system in this country, a crisis exists, particularly for African American children. According to the National Committee for Adoption (1989), "Black children with the goal of adoption suffer a major disadvantage in comparison with Whites and other minorities" (p. 191).

The Opposition

In 1972, the NABSW took an aggressive stand against the adoption of African American children by Whites. The NABSW opposed the placement of Black children with White foster or adoptive parents and referred to such placements as cultural genocide. The Child Welfare League of America (CWLA) (1987) changed its standards for adoption practice to emphasize the recruitment of African American adoptive parents and to place transracially only as a last resort. Local adoption agencies were assisted in organizing campaigns to recruit potential African American foster and adoptive parents through the mass media and by targeting Black churches, fraternal organizations, and civic groups (D. C. Moore, personal communication, August 18, 1994). Although same-race adoptions became a priority, similar standards for foster-care placements were not necessarily maintained. More than two decades later, NABSW continues to argue for same-race placement for African American children in foster care and adoption.

The NABSW supports broad-based improvements in the child-placement system. In 1991, NABSW published Preserving AfricanAmerican Families: Research and Action beyond the Rhetoric, which provides an in-depth analysis of the status of African American children in the child-placement system. Included in the document is a proposal to amend P.L. 95-603, the Indian Child Welfare Act, to require protections in foster care and adoption placement currently afforded American Indian children to African American children (National Association of Black Social Workers, 1991). Provisions for recruitment, periodic reviews, reporting and record keeping, and a mandatory monitoring body are included to ensure protections for all children. Arguments in support of this type of legislative amendment are based in part on concern for protecting the ethnic and cultural identity of African American children and avoiding foster-care drift.1

Some arguments against transracial adoption originate from long-term problems with the child-placement system. Child-welfare agencies have repeatedly been accused of putting their interests ahead of the interests of children (Close, 1983; Day, 1979; Hogan & Siu, 1988; Howard, 1984). Decisions to place a child are at times influenced by concerns about the costs of out-of-home placement. The State of New York, for example, issued a legislative mandate to place 6,000 children in adoptive homes during the 1994-95 fiscal year. Typically, fewer than approximately 2,000 children per year are placed for adoption (A. Simmonds, personal communication, September 26, 1994).

This policy change was likely to affect the number of children placed transracially, but with placement decisions motivated by mandates to cut the costs of state-administered outof-home care.

Research supports that child-placement programs should ensure that transracial adoptees be raised in racially aware contexts (Andujo, 1988; Rushton, 1989; Small, 1984). McRoy, Zurcher, Lauderdale, and Anderson (1982) compared Black children adopted by African American families with Black children adopted by White families. The authors examined whether differences existed in the children's level of self-esteem and racial identity. Decisions to place a child are at times influenced by concerns about the costs of out-of-home placement.

Although no differences in self-esteem were found, children in African American families ranked higher on scales evaluating racial identity. The authors recommended that independent assessments of the total ecological environment occur when transracial adoptions are completed. Small (1984) identified enhancing a positive racial identity among children and providing the cultural milieu necessary to live in a racist society as problematic for transracially adopted children and their adoptive parents.

Andujo (1988) found that ethnic identity was more of a problem for transethnic adoptees than for same-ethnicity adoptees. Robert Carter, a professor of psychology and education at Teachers College of Columbia University, is currently conducting research on transracial and biracial identity development; he has found that adoptees who seem well adjusted and productive feel racially incomplete (Williams, 1995). According to Carter, young adoptees in their twenties and thirties are confronted by racism and prejudice but do not yet have the skills to cope with them successfully that other African Americans acquire as children. These findings are significant because cultural heritage and the ethnic identity of a child are essential to their psychological sense of self and health.

Kallgren and Caudill (1993), however, found that among agencies in four metropolitan areas actively engaged in transracial adoption, the majority of agencies did not provide support systems for parents adopting transracially to help them create a racially sensitive home environment. Child advocates opposing transracial placement insist that African American children must be assisted in confronting racism and supported in their efforts to enhance their cultural identity; advocates do not believe this goal will be accomplished by White parents (Chimezie, 1977; National Association of Black Social Workers, 1991). According to Welsing, African Americans should not expect Whites to teach them how to survive White-supremacist behaviors and attitudes or to reveal their honest feelings about people of color, which are likely shared among Whites behind closed doors (E C. Welsing, personal communication, June 16, 1995).

Adults who spent their childhood in foster homes and institutions and adults who experienced transracial adoption are also critical of transracial placement. A young and articulate African American female, age 21, spoke before a predominately African American and middleincome church congregation, urging members to consider becoming foster or adoptive parents to a child or sibling group in need of a nurturing home. She shared some of her experiences, including the sense of lost identity, lowered selfesteem, and emotional yearning. Based on her experiences, which included White foster parents who did not know what to do with her hair, she stated that African American children need to be placed in Afri-can American homes (R. Magris, personal communication, August 24, 1994). A 31-year-old African American male adopted by White parents at age two complained about not knowing what being Black meant in terms of culture and collective kinship. After a long estrangement, he has recently reestablished ties with his adoptive family (Williams, 1995). This man now strongly opposes transracial adoption because his parents did not prepare him to deal with racism.

The Proponents

During the late 1970s and 1980s, various studies attempted to dispel the belief that White families cannot effectively raise emotionally healthy African American children. Grow and Shapiro (1974) evaluated the "success" of transracial adoptions through personal interviews with parents, siblings, and teachers and by administering personality tests to the children and comparing their scores to same-race adopted White children. The authors found that 77% of the children adjusted successfully. Similar findings were reported by Altstein and Simon (1977), who reported that African American children raised by White parents did not acquire a preference for White over Black. Johnson, Shireman, and Watson (1987) found that even when African American children were raised in White neighborhoods and had little contact with other African Americans, approximately three-fourths of the transracially adopted children seemed well adjusted to their social environment. Other researchers found that African American children adopted transracially had higher IQ performance scores than did African American children adopted by same-race parents (Moore,1987; Scarr & Weinberg,1983).

Little research is available to refute the findings of studies supporting transracial adoption. However, Chimezie (1977) questioned the validity and reliability of the Grow and Shapiro (1974) study, which did not employ a comparison group and did not use inferential statistics to test relationships between and among variables. Some have argued, however, that opposition to transracial adoption based on the need to preserve a child's racial or cultural identity is political in nature; racial and ethnic identity are not as critical as other indicators of a successful life, for example, IQ performance (Hayes, 1993; Howard, 1984). Hayes (1993) states that "minority children placed for adoption have neither the right nor the need to develop a distinct ethnic identity or awareness of cultural heritage" (p. 304). Howard (1984) argued that the number of transracial adoptions involving African American children have been too few to warrant a charge of "cultural genocide," and therefore the protections afforded American Indian children and contained in the Indian Child Welfare Act are not appropriate or necessary for African American children.

Sentiment among those who support transracial placement is so strong that a public-interest law firm in Washington, D.C., recently launched a "national campaign" to force states, via the courts, to approve more adoptions of Black children by White families (Davis, 1995). Because social policy is influenced by judicial decisions, an examination of extant legal decisions is pertinent.

Judicial Decisions Involving Transracial Adoption

The issue of race has been addressed by the courts in child-placement cases primarily when parents of different races seek custody after divorce, when a divorced parent with custody remarries interracially and the noncustodial parent seeks custody, and when an African American child is placed for adoption (FordeMazrui, 1994). In all circumstances, the courts used the best-interests-of-the-child standard to assess the material, moral, and emotional qualities and responsibility of the parent(s) as well as their willingness to provide the care, affection, and training the parental relationship implies (Words & Phrases, 1968). Decisions are based on whether the interests of children were protected and if due process was assured for all interested parties.

In the 1950s, the courts placed biracial children in the custody of the nonwhite parent, which suggested that children should be brought up among people like themselves (Ward v. Ward, 1950). When the issue of race became a factor in interracial marriage or in a custodial parent's nonmarital relationship with someone of another race, the courts began to reject the consideration of race in awarding custody. For example, in Kramer . Kramer (1980), the Iowa Supreme Court ruled that race should not be a determining factor in deciding custody cases. A lower court had awarded custody of two children to the father after he reported observing a Black man asleep on the sofa in his exwife's house. The trial court indicated that it was not in the best interests of the children to be subjected to a biracial relationship.

In reversing the trial court decision, the Iowa Supreme Court cited three other cases in support of the appellant's equal protection argument (Beazley v. Davis, 1976; Loving v. Virginia, 1967; McLaughlin v. Florida, 1964). In two other cases lending support to Kramer v. Kramer (1980), the courts struck down state statutes proscribing biracial adoptions as violating equal protection rights under the state constitution and the fourteenth amendment (Compos v. McKeithen, 1972; In re Gomez, 1967). These cases demonstrated that state regulations, in which race is automatically a determinative factor in child-custody cases, are suspect and subject to strict scrutiny, requiring equal-protection analysis under the Constitution (Blacks Law Dictionary,1979).

******************************************** In the 1950s, the courts placed biracial children in the custody of the nonwhite parent, which suggested that children should be brought up among people like themselves. ********************************************

In placing a child in foster care or when securing a permanent placement for a child, the issue of race has also been addressed by the courts when White foster parents contend that they have been unconstitutionally denied the right to adopt a Black child because of race. In Drummond v. Fulton County Department of Family and Children's Services (1978), a biracial infant was placed in a White foster home. After a year, the foster parents applied to adopt the child, but their petition was denied. The agency cited several reasons for the denial, including a preference to place the child in an African American home. The trial court and the court of appeals upheld the right of the agency to consider various factors, including race. "Neither the trial court nor this court has the desire nor the authority to second-guess the Department of Family and Children Services on the fitness or suitability of anyone as adoptive parents."

In re R.M.G. (1982), the trial court found both the White foster parents and the paternal grandmother to be suitable to adopt a child born to African American teenage parents and placed in a White foster home. The court concluded, however, that the race factor tipped the scales in favor of the grandparent. The District of Columbia appeals court determined that a statute that considered race among other factors was relevant when deciding between competing petitions for adoption. The statute and the trial court's application of it were subjected to strict scrutiny (In re R.M.G., 1982).

This case has been cited as an example of the courts' overemphasizing race without regard for other important factors, for example, the child never lived with the grandparent (FordeMazrui, 1994). The child was placed with the grandmother, however, not solely because of race, but also because a blood relationship existed. Considering race and blood relationships is consistent with the provisions of the Adoption Assistance Act, which was intended to keep families together when appropriate, facilitate the reunification of families, and find permanent homes for children.

The history of state and federal court decisions in child-custody cases in which the child is of a race different from the parents or the parents are of different races provides evidence of a subjective application of the best-interest standard in considerations of race. It is not surprising, therefore, that the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to consider a case in which a White mother was forced to relinquish custody of her daughter to the child's father after the mother remarried an African American man (Palmore v. Sidoti, 1984). The Supreme Court reversed the trial court by stating that race may not be the determining factor in child-custody cases.

The decision did not preclude, however, the consideration of race as one of several factors. Because the Supreme Court (Palmore v. Sidoti, 1984) did not preclude the consideration of race as one of several factors in child-placement cases, why did the U.S. Congress legislate federal protection for transracial adoption?

Multiethnic Placement Legislation

Recent newspaper articles and television programs have featured cases in which White foster families wanting to adopt an African American child previously in their care were denied petitions to adopt. Many child-placement agencies prefer to place African American children in Black homes. In one case, a toddler boy was removed from a White foster family after the family's interest in adopting the child was disclosed. The child was placed with an African American couple who were later charged with the child's untimely death (Jenkins & Spitz, 1994). In a different but related set of circumstances, an African American foster mother was denied the right to adopt both an Asian and Hispanic child because "it was a bad match" (Jenkins & Spitz, 1994, p. A9).

The belief that these practices are unconstitutional and harmful provided impetus for the Multiethnic Placement Act of 1994. Introduced by Senator Howard Metzenbaum (1994), the legislation was intended to reduce the length of time children wait to be adopted and to prevent discrimination in the placement of children in foster care or adoption on the basis of race, color, or national origin. Proponents of legislative protection for transracial adoption argue that giving preference to same-race adoptions and foster-care placement denies thousands of minority children a permanent, loving, and stable home. The revised and final version of this legislation prohibits any agency receiving federal funds from denying a foster-care or adoption placement solely on the basis of race, color, or national origin. Noncompliance with the act constitutes a violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Attached to several major pieces of legislation, the provisions of the Multiethnic Placement Act passed the U.S. Senate as an amendment to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (H.R. 6). The U.S. House of Representatives agreed to the provisions of the Senate version in conference. President Clinton signed H.R. 6, including provisions in the Multiethnic Placement Act, on October 22, 1994.

Conclusions

Social welfare policy aimed at protecting the practice of transracial adoption in this country, however well-intended, will not resolve the problems of the child-placement system. The Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Assistance Act, which governs foster care and adoptions and is aimed at reducing the number of children in foster care, requires full funding for states to implement services aimed at strengthening and reuniting families and improving foster care and adoption programs. Recognition of this fact is evidenced by the recent passage of the Children's Initiative, contained in the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (OBRA) of 1993 (P.L. 103-66). Intended to address problems associated with the child-placement system, this initiative provides additional federal funding for child-welfare services; for courts to assess and improve their handling of placement proceedings; for states to initiate automated data systems; and for training of staff, foster parents, and adoptive parents to assist children in the child-placement system and to support the parents who adopt and foster them.

Social workers have been accused of vacillitating on the issue of transracial adoption (Howard, 1984). Typically cited are changes in the CWLA Standards for Adoption Services, which in 1958 stated that race should not be a factor when placing a child for adoption; subsequent versions of the standards acknowledged a preference for same-race placement while not condemning transracial placements (Child Welfare League of America, 1987). Howard (1984) contended that changes in policy during a 35-year period call into question the credibility of the profession: "The profession may have defaulted on the question of expertise and lost any credible claim that its determinations should be granted special deference in placement decisions" (p. 530).

The NABSW has maintained its opposition to transracial adoption for more than 20 years (T. Oliver, personal communication, September 6, 1994): According to the National Association of Black Social Workers (1991), "The Association affirms the inviolable position of African American children in African American families where they belong physically, psychologically and culturally in order that they receive the total sense of themselves and develop a sound projection of their future" (p. 25 ).

Recommendations

Although several researchers, including proponents of transracial placement, agree that same-race placements are preferable and transracial placements should be considered when African American families are available for Black children (McRoy, 1994), public sentiment for the transracial placement of African American children seems to outweigh calls for caution and conditional consideration (McRoy, 1994; Zuniga, 1991). The NABSW and others critical of transracial placement base their criticisms in part on the child-welfare system, whose placement practices are not supported by social research and knowledge about transracial adoptions. Based on what is known, the following recommendations are offered for states and local jurisdictions responsible for policies governing the adoption and foster-care placement of African American children:

* State and local governments should assume primary financial responsibility for the recruitment and retention of foster and adoptive parents who are racially and culturally representative of the children awaiting placement.

* Training and financial support to meet licensure standards for foster parents are essential and must be the responsibility of state and local governments legally charged with child protection when parental rights are called into question.

* Families who wish to provide foster care or to adopt transracially (or transculturally) must be assisted in examining their feelings and attitudes about the birth culture and race of the child(ren) to be placed. Training in the development of positive racial identity for children should also be provided. The assistance toward self-awareness and training in racial-identity development must be mandatory.

* Independent evaluations and self-assessments of families who adopt transracially should be conducted periodically, depending on the age of the adopted child. These evaluations should be mandatory.

The problems of foster-care drift and minority overrepresentation in the child-placement system will not be solved by placing African American children in White homes. It is ironic that those espousing policies that are in the best interests of children seldom address the issues of licensing more African American families or eliminating the institutional barriers that inhibit the effective recruitment and retention of African American foster and adoptive parents; even less attention is given to addressing the economic and social conditions that prevent a growing number of families, regardless of race, to care effectively for their children. Such recommendations are often met with resistance and labeled as being too lofty or representing "old information."

"Racism is still a plague in America" (Williams, 1995). As the primary source of socialization for any child, the family is key to providing those racial and cultural points of reference for healthy development (Zuniga, 1991). On the basis of individual and institutional realism, Zuniga (1991) advocates teach ing parents of color consciously to prepare their children "to cognitively recognize racism rather than experiencing its negative effects" (p. 24). She also encourages parents to teach children how to address acts of racism. "If this kind of teaching is viewed as necessary for minority natural parents, its need is underscored for non-minority adoptive parents" (Zuniga, 1991, p. 24).

1. Foster-care drift refers to the movement of children in and out of the child-placement system as well as to the movement of children from one foster-care home or institutional-care facility to another as a result of the lack of a plan for adoption or permanent foster care.

REFERENCES

Altstein, H., & Simon, R. J. (1977). Transracial adoption: An examination of an American phenomenon. journal of Social Welfare, 4(2-3), 63-71. Altstein, H., & Simon, R. J. (1992). Adoption, race, and identity: From infancy through adolescence. New York: Praeger. Andujo, E. (1988). Ethnic identity of transethnically adopted Hispanic adolescents. Social Work, 33, 531-535. Auld, J. P. (1993). Racial matching vs. transracial adoptions: Proposing a compromise in the best interest of minority children. Family Law Quarterly, 27, 447-460. Bartholet, E. (1991). Where do black children belong? The politics of race matching in adoption. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 139, 1163-1256. Beazley v. Davis. 92 Nev. 81, 545 P2d 206. (1976). Billingsley, A. (1968). Black families in white America. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Black's law dictionary (5th ed.). (1979). St. Paul, MN: West Publishing. Children's Defense Fund. (1992). The state of America's children 1992. Washington, DC: Author. Child Welfare League of America. (1987). Standards for adoption services. New York: Author. Chimezie, A. (1977). Bold but irrelevant: Grow and Shapiro on transracial adoption. Child Welfare, 56, 75-86. Close, M. M. (1983). Child welfare and people of color: Denial of equal access. Social Work Research and Abstracts, 19(4), 13-20. Compos v. McKeithen. 341 E Supp. 264 (E.D. LA. 1972). Davis, R. (1995, April 13). Suits back interracial adoptions. USA Today, p. B12.

Day, D. (1979). The adoption of black children. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. Drummond v. Fulton County Department of Family and Children's Services. 563 Eld 1200 (Sth Cir 1977), cert. denied, 437 U.S. 910 (1978). Forde-Mazrui, K. (1994). Black identity and child placement: The best interests of black and biracial children. Michigan Law Review, 92, 925-967. Grow, L. J., & Shapiro D. (1974). Black children white parents: A study of transracial adoption. New York: Child Welfare League of America. Hayes, P. (1993). Transracial adoption: Politics and ideology. Child Welfare, 72, 301-310. Hogan, P. T., & Siu, S. F (1988). Minority children and the child welfare system: An historical perspective. Social Work, 33, 493-498. Howard, M. (1984). Transracial adoption: Analysis of the best interests standard. Notre Dame Law Review, 59, 503-555. In re Gomez. 424 S.W. 2d 656 (Tex. Cir. App. 1967). In re R.M.G. 454 A. 2d 776, 791 (D.C. 1982). Jenkins, C. M., & Spitz, K. (1994, May 8). Kids of color: Transracial adoption an issue of growing importance. Akron Beacon Journal, pp. 1, 8, 9. Johnson, P., Shireman, J., & Watson, K. (1987). Transracial adoption and the development of black identity at age eight. Child Welfare, 66, 45-56. Kallgren, C. A., & Caudill, P J. (1993). Current transracial adoption practices: Racial dissonance or racial awareness? Psychological Reports, 72, 551-558. Kramer v. Kramer. 297 N. W. 2d 359 (Iowa 1980). Ladner, J. A. (1977). Mixed families. Garden City, NY: Anchor Press. Legislative History. (1980). Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980. PL. 96-272. U.S. Code

Congressional and Administration News, No. 3, 96th Congress, 2nd Session 1980. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing. Loving v. Virginia. 388 U.S. 1, 97 S. Ct. 1917, 18L Ed. 2d 1010 (1967). McLaughlin v. Florida. 379 U.S. 184, 85 S. Ct. 283, 13 L. Ed. 2d 222 (1964). McRoy, R. G. (1994). Attachment and racial identity issues: Implications for child placement decisionmaking. Journal of Multicultural Social Work, 3(3), 59-74. McRoy, R. G., Zurcher, L. A., Lauderdale, M. L., & Anderson, R. N. (1982). Self-esteem and racial identity in transracial adoption. Social Work, 27, 522-526. Metzenbaum, H. (1994). The Metzenbaum amendment to S. 1569. Background information on the Multiethnic Placement Act of 1994. Washington, DC: Author. Moore, E. G. (1987). Ethnic social milieu and black children's intelligence test achievement. Journal of Negro Education, 56(1), 44-52. National Association of Black Social Workers. (1991). Preserving African-American families: Research and

action beyond the rhetoric. Detroit, MI: Author. National Committee for Adoption. (1989). Adoption factbook: United States data, issues, regulations and resources. Washington, DC: Author. Palmore v. Sidoti. 466 U.S. 429, 104 S. Ct. 1897 (1984). Rushton, A. (1989). Post-placement services for foster and adoptive families-support, counseling or ther apy? Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 30, 197-204. Scarr, S., & Weinberg, R. A. (1983). The Minnesota Adoption Studies: Genetic difference and malleability. Child Development, 54, 260-267. Small, J. W. (1984). The crisis in adoption. International Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 129-142. Ward v. Ward. 36 Washin. 2d 143, 216 p. 2d 755, 756 (1950). Williams, L. (1995, March 23). Transracial adoption: The truth comes in shades of gray. New York Times, pp. B1, B5. Words and phrases. (1968). 5, pp. 552-553. St. Paul,

MN: West Publishing Co. Zuniga, M. E. (1991). Transracial adoption: Educating the parents. Journal of Multicultural Social Work, 1(2), 17-31.

Carla M. Curtis is Assistant Professor, College of Social Work, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.

Copyright Family Service America Mar 1996
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved