The Danger of Limiting Transracial Adoption

Proposed changes to the Multi-Ethnic Placement Act would result in fewer black children finding safe and loving homes.

By
21

Over the weekend, The Dispatch’s David French wrote about the new report from Bethany Christian Services dealing with transracial adoption. As part of what it describes as its “long journey toward becoming an anti-racist organization,” Bethany is calling for changes to the Multi-Ethnic Placement Act to allow race to be a factor in determining adoption placements. Such a change would make it harder for white families to adopt non-white children. In his column, David  made a passing reference to my objections to this change that I wrote about in Newsweek last week. Unfortunately, he did not engage with the substance of my argument.

It is not simply that I think wokeness or critical race theory is bad. That is a subject for another column on another day. It is that I think overturning the Multi-Ethnic Placement Act, which is what Bethany proposes, will result in fewer black children finding loving and permanent homes. 

As I wrote last week: 

Since MEPA and the Adoption and Safe Families Act (which reduced the allowable time for kids to remain in care and which racial activists also want to overturn) were passed in the mid-90s, adoptions “have increased from about thirty thousand to fifty thousand per year,” according to a 2020 article by the Brookings Institution’s Ron Haskins. “Moreover, the average time states took to complete adoption of children from foster care was reduced by about one year.” What this means in practice is clear, writes Haskins: “More kids adopted; faster adoptions. A double victory.”

Keep reading with a free account
Create a free Dispatch account to keep reading Get Started ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
21
By
Comments (21)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    Ben Connelly

    I appreciate the point/counterpoint the Dispatch is doing on this issue. Like most commenters I think it speaks highly of this publication.

    Collapse
  2. Michelle C

    Thank you for this spot on piece. Thank you, Dispatch, for publishing it. I am involved with foster care and I couldn’t agree more.

    Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    Jason Gibson

    I'm so proud that the dispatch allows this kind of intellectual discussion and debate among it's writers.

    I liked David's article and felt that he made good points. This article makes good points as well

    I'm a social worker (technician) that works with at risk families BEFORE going to foster care. The goal of our organization is to PREVENT placement and maintain (if possible to do so safely) the placement with family of origin by strength focused intensive problem solving. Our success numbers are dramatically high.

    In my experience once a child has entered the foster care system there is already an added trauma. In the most extreme cases the move to foster care is almost completely positive. But the foster care system in many places is routinely overwhelmed. There simply aren't enough families to meet the need.

    Despite agreeing with David's priorities I think this article is more attuned to the actual needs that are out there. I'm not a CPS worker but I do know that sometimes they have to move heaven and earth to get an emergency placement. I think it's gotten better since there has been a move to prioritizing placement with extended family (if they are deemed appropriate). However in some situations that begin with trauma (for example being raised in a drug house, domestic violence etc.) we are talking about priorities that require great patience, skill, and and ability to nurture and intervene. These are often severely traumatized children! In these cases the race of the family THOUGH NOT A NON FACTOR in my judgement is not one of the most important.

    I know next to nothing about international adoption and i realize that my experience is only a certain percentage of the issue. But the fact is that foster parents often are the adoptive parents of the children they take in. It should be noted that continuing the process of moving a child from their family of origin to a foster family then to another foster family then having to find a THIRD foster family (I'm making up this example) due to the insufficient racial identity of the first two families can create MORE trauma rather than less. (note that in this example the child would have to get used to adults coming in and out of their lives...this would create a difficulty in developing a bond)

    I defer to David and Naomi on the numbers. But I will at least put out there that there are very important issues in the lives of many of these children that transcend the political.

    Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Victor Clairmont

    Excellent response.

    I was absolutely bewildered by David’s stance and many who defended it. I was pretty sure the policy change would make it harder for black children to be adopted, and this article does point to the flaws in David’s reasoning.

    If you are a stable family, and wish to adopt an African, Chinese, India, or Italian kid, go for it. You can work through the kinks and grow together, hopefully in love. The fact that Bethany is being infected by backwards thinking is not something to be praised. If it makes adoption harder, then it may not be the best policy.

    Good on The Dispatch for running a counter argument and allowing clarification.

    It would be great to have a David write another article about this, or perhaps invite Mrs Riley onto one of the Dispatches podcasts so they could talk about their views more.

    Collapse
  5. Avatar photo
    Xaveria

    I find you points compelling! A minor quibble — let me suggest that “let a thousand flowers bloom” is not the phrase you are looking for. Its connotations, historically, are that a broad open-minded approach to something can lead to tragic consequences to the unwary, exactly what your opponents would argue, I imagine.

    Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    BW

    Thank you! I challenged David in his piece on this very issue, and even asked if I misinterpreted. The only thing that will come of trying to limit inter-racial adoption is children jumping from foster family to foster family, or living in a children’s shelter. Both outcomes are unequivocally worse.

    Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    Kevin Johnson

    Great piece. To paraphrase a famous judge, the way to end racial discrimination is to stop discriminating by race. To paraphrase a wise TD commentator (me) David’s approach would empower radical “experts” to quiz certain parents (based on their skin color) on CRT texts to determine fitness. No amount of good intentions can point that road toward a good place.

    Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    Jack

    Reason 1 why the Dispatch is awesome: it provides opposing viewpoints.

    Collapse
  9. Daniel

    Let me add a few points to Naomi's well written article.

    David says the proposals “would neither (1) ban nor (2) create legal obstacles for transracial adoption.” The first point is true. The second is not.

    If an agency denies an adoption because the parents fail to demonstrate “the capacity . . . to meet the needs of the cultural, ethnic, or racial background” of the child -- then to court we go. Under current law the parents would win their case. With this proposal – better pray for a judge that doesn’t share the vogue politics of the day or you will indeed see a legal barrier to adopting a lovely child.

    Practically speaking, what magic questions can one ask to determine the “capacity of the prospective parent to meet the needs of such background?” We would be outraged if someone proposed these types of questions on gay couples, religious couples, atheists couples, Republican couples, Democrat couples and so on.

    Williams says, “What we are saying is, it’s very harmful to children to go into this situation with a colorblind philosophy.” Shocking to see David entertain these ideas - I don't believe a family that reads Kendi (or decides not to) is better suited to raise a child. This ugly stuff should have died 50 years with Loving v. Virginia – it is amazing to see classic liberals play footsie with these ideas.

    Since personal anecdotes carry water here – humbly keep Williams and her ilk away from my “mixed-race” children (their term not mine).

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Victor Clairmont

      This bi-racial kid agrees with you.

      There has been a consistent assault on MLK’s colorblind approach for the past two decades, and it is sometimes just silly how people use nuance to entertain some of the worst theoretical idea’s out there.

      Collapse
  10. Avatar photo
    DJS

    Love seeing a response here, would like to see Naomi and David discuss this more.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Victor Clairmont

      Make it so Steve and David.

      Collapse
Load More