Adoption Near and Far: A Comparison of American, Romanian

and Indian Domestic Adoptions

Victor Groza , Ph. D.Professor of Social Work

Mandel School of Applied Social Sciences11235 Bellflower Road

Case Western Reserve UniversityCleveland, Ohio 44106

(216) 368‑6682

Key Learning Objectives: To provide participants with the necessary

background for understanding adoption practice in other countries

To learn about family and child policy and adoption policy and practice in Romania and

India, contrasting their system with the American system

To understand the logistics and issues that emerge in conducting adoption research in

other countries

Year of Study by Country

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

Methods—Issues to Consider

Sample– Clinic vs. Community– Random vs. Convenience– Comparison Group

Approach– Single method (quantitative or qualitative) vs. mixed

methods– Surveys (In home, in office or via mail)– Observational approaches– Case Studies

Measures—Issues to Consider

What we choose to measure should be informed by theory

We need to balance assessing problems with assessing strengths

Measures—Instruments used in various countries

India Romania America

Child Behavior Checklist X X X

Behavior & Emotional Rating Scale (Strengths)

X X

Parenting Scale X

Family Adaptability and Cohesion Evaluation Scales (FACES)

X

Questionnaire items (including placement history, parent-child relationships, handicaps, educational functioning, service use and needs)—individual items are also project specific

X X X

Lessons Learned about Research

Involve parents in study design Involve parents in reviewing results Deconstruct major trends to look for

nuances Draw from multiple perspective including

behavioral genetics, child development, psychology and social work

Across countries—lessons learned about research

Research instruments should be viewed by families and pre-tested in country when possible/practical, particularly for cultural sensitivity/relevance.

Be prepared to make daily modifications in translations for the first week of conducting the study.

With good preparation, families are willing to accept researchers (and foreigners) in their home to talk about their adoptions.

Any researcher must collaborate with in-country adoption workers in deciphering results.

The Child Welfare System Differences

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

COMPARISON OF FAMILY FOSTER CARE TO INSTITUTIONAL CARE

FAMILY CARE love affection structure 1:1 attention individual focus belonging to an extended system of

relations stimulation through relationships

INSTITUTIONAL CARE acceptance/tolerance distance routine 1:8-35 attention group focus belong/identify to the group stimulation thru programs

Risks to Children from Early Institutionalization

– Health– Development– Attachment– Psychosocial (Emotional and Behavioral)

Functioning

Other in Different Countries

AmericaNon-voluntary termination of parental rightsSubsidyFormal and informal systems of post-placement support

RomaniaAbandonmentNo subsidyMinimal post-placement support

IndiaAbandonmentSavings accountsSome post-placement supportOnly Hindus can adopt in-country; Moslems and Christians have permanent, legal guardianship

0102030405060708090

100

Percentfemale

PercentMoms*

PercentMarried

IndiaRomaniaAmerica

Selected Child and Family Demographics

Parent-Child Relations

00.20.40.60.8

11.21.41.6

Gett

ing A

long

Comm

unicatio

nTru

st

Respec

t

Close

nss

IndiaRomaniaAmerica

Adoption Smoothness*

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Smoother AsExpected

More Upsand Down

IndiaRomaniaAmerica

Adoption Impact

01020

304050

607080

90

VeryPositive

MostlyPositive

Mixed

IndiaRomaniaAmerica

Behavior Problems

India Romania America

Somatic Complaints .68 .37 .38

Anxiety/Depression* 2.2 1.8 .71

Social Problems* 2.3 1.0 2.0

Withdrawal 1.3 .49 1.3

Thought Problems* .91 .18 .63

Attention Problems* 2.7 1.2 2.6

Aggressiveness* 6.6 3.0 5.8

Across countries—lessons learned about families

Families were more similar than they were different Children had more similarities than differences Families had few service needs that went unmet The service system issues were different by country Birth family issues were much more prominent a concern

in Romania and India than with American families. Family environment is powerful in shaping adoption

outcomes and mitigating the risk children bring to families, but there is still so much to learn