From Kindness and Diversity to Justice and Action: White Parents’ Ethnic

Abstract

Ethnic–racial socialization (ERS) is the collection of practices by which individuals learn about norms, values, and customs regarding ethnicity and race (Hughes et al., 2006). In contrast to research with families of color, few studies have examined ERS among White families (Umaña-Taylor & Hill, 2020). In this study, we used the Consensual Qualitative Research procedure (Hill et al., 2005) to analyze the ERS goals expressed by 35 White parents of White children during semi-structured interviews. We identified 11 domains (privilege awareness, take action, racism, value diversity, egalitarianism, children lead the way, informed, embracing the difficulty of being anti-racist, empathy, protection, and racial–ethnic identity) that generally map onto Hughes et al.’s (2006) existing ERS framework. Our results suggest that some White parents have ERS goals that move beyond kindness and diversity to delve into issues of equity and justice in order to support children in their own anti-racist journies.

Keywords

race/ethnicity ethnic–racial socialization White families parent–child relations qualitative

Ethnic–racial socialization (ERS) is the set of practices by which individuals learn about norms, values, and customs regarding ethnicity and race. In the United States, ERS is often a core component of parenting among families of color (Hughes et al., 2006; Neblett et al., 2012). Parents of color regularly attempt to provide information to prepare their children for racialized experiences, such as pressure to assimilate to the dominant (White) culture, negative stereotypes, discrimination, and racial violence (Priest et al., 2014). The specific goals that parents have for their children of color vary according to many factors (e.g., family heritage and child’s age), but common ERS themes include encouraging racial egalitarianism, promoting cultural practices, instilling group pride, and preparing children for bias (Hughes et al., 2006).

In contrast to research with families of color, few studies have examined ERS among White families (Loyd & Gaither, 2018). A review of research conducted in the 2010s found that only 10 of 259 studies focused on the ERS of White parents with White children (Umaña-Taylor & Hill, 2020). On the one hand, there may be few studies of White families’ ERS because there is little to study (Lesane-Brown et al., 2010). The limited research suggests that most White families are silent about race, and their dominant ERS goal is racial “colorblindness” (Vittrup, 2018; Zucker & Patterson, 2018). Alternatively, much of the existing data on White parents’ ERS were collected in the early 2010s—a time when many White people believed the United States was “post-racial” (Bonilla-Silva & Dietrich, 2011). Even before the murder of George Floyd and the uprisings that followed, racialized events such as Donald Trump’s disparaging remarks about people of color throughout his presidency and the Charlottesville White nationalist rally in 2017 may have spurred White parents into more “color-conscious” goals for their children’s ERS.

Moreover, there have always been White parents who have aimed beyond colorblindness in their ERS goals (Hagerman, 2014; Matlock & DiAngelo, 2015). In this study, we intentionally recruited White parents from a time and place where we believed race would be more salient than has been previously demonstrated: in 2018 from a school that includes social justice (and racial justice, in particular) as part of its mission. Using Hill et al.’s (2005) Consensual Qualitative Research approach, we identified these parents’ hopes and goals for their White children’s ethnicity- and race-related thoughts, attitudes, emotions, values, and behaviors.

Ethnic–Racial Socialization Goals

We use the broad term ERS to refer to all practices by which parents transmit ethnic and racial information to their children (Hughes et al., 2006). Schwartz et al. (2014) argue that there is considerable overlap between the constructs of ethnicity and race, and Hughes et al. (2006) note that parents’ socialization practices rarely focus on just ethnic or just racial issues. This is likely to be true for White parents as well, who may have both ethnic (e.g., understanding European heritage) and racial (e.g., understanding White privilege) goals for their children.

This study focused on White parents’ ERS goals—not practices—because the overlap between ERS goals and practices may be elusive in White families (Matlock & DiAngelo, 2015). Imagine, for example, White parents whose main ERS “practice” is silence about race. These parents may want their child to believe that race is not important in American culture, or they may want their child to believe that race is, but it should not be important. Alternatively, these parents may have any number of other ERS goals, but believe that their children are not ready for such conversations (Sullivan et al., 2020). Although it is critical to study White parents’ ERS practices, these practices can only be understood in the context of parents’ ERS goals.

Research with families of color suggests four common ERS goals—egalitarianism, cultural socialization, preparation for bias, and promotion of mistrust. Corollaries of these goals may be present among White families. Given the unique history and position of Whiteness in the United States, however, these goals (if they appear) will likely manifest in distinct ways.

Egalitarianism—wanting children to treat everyone equally and emphasize individuality over racial group membership—is a common goal among families of all races (Hughes et al., 2006). Often, parents of color promote egalitarian messages to help their children learn how to work with White people and develop skills for navigating spaces of privilege (Priest et al., 2014). Among White families, egalitarian goals may stem from similar motivations (e.g., wanting children to be able to successfully navigate diverse settings). Other White families, however, may believe that racism is a problem of the past, and thus, the goals underlying their egalitarian messages may be hopes that children will ignore racial differences and dismiss the existence of institutional racism and White privilege (Bonilla-Silva & Dietrich, 2011; Neville et al., 2013).

Many parents of color also report cultural socialization goals for their children—the hope that, despite marginalization in dominant U.S. culture, children will understand and feel proud of their group’s history and traditions (Umaña-Taylor & Hill, 2020). Some White families, especially those with strong ethnic identities (e.g., Jews or recent immigrants), may share this type of cultural socialization as a goal (Hughes et al., 2006). Yet, for White families whose cultural background is well represented in mainstream society, emphasizing their own heritage may not be a priority. Indeed, many White Americans mistakenly believe that “race” and “ethnic culture” apply only to other groups and not to them (Hamm, 2001; Jackson & Heckman, 2002). These White families may, nonetheless, have a form of cultural socialization goals, but their goals may consist of wanting to educate their children about other groups’ heritage (Pahlke et al., 2012). In fact, many White families report wanting their children to be exposed to “diversity” so that they can learn about, appreciate, and celebrate the cultures of others (Underhill, 2018).

Beyond cultural socialization, many families of color have preparation for bias goals—goals of teaching their children about racial discrimination and helping them develop strategies for coping with these experiences (Hughes et al., 2006). White families could have the same goal if they believe White people face racial discrimination (Hughey, 2014; Jackson & Heckman, 2002). However, other White parents may want their White children to understand that bias and racial discrimination happen to people of color (Vittrup, 2018). Alternatively, some White parents may focus on their group’s own role in the racial hierarchy and want to prepare their child for the privileges that the U.S. culture affords White people (Hagerman, 2017).

Finally, a relatively rare ERS goal among families of color is promotion of mistrust—wanting children to be wary and vigilant in interracial interactions (Hughes et al., 2006). This goal stems from the very real dangers that people of color can face in interracial interactions, such as police brutality. White families who believe that anti-White bias is on the rise may have similar goals (Norton & Sommers, 2011), but in our sample of progressive White families, we expect this type of promotion of mistrust to be rare. These families, however, may hold a related, but different, goal: wanting their White children to be cautious in interracial interactions to avoid seeming racist. As DiAngelo (2011) notes, many White progressives are extremely sensitive to racial feedback, and if their behavior is ever labeled as racist, they respond with a range of negative emotions (e.g., anger, fear, guilt; Spanierman & Heppner, 2004). White parents with these beliefs may hope to protect their children from such negative emotions.

Current Study

The central aim of the current study is to describe White parents’ ERS goals. We expect to find goals that overlap with the previously identified themes: egalitarianism, cultural socialization, preparation for bias, and promotion of mistrust. Given the nascence of ERS research with White families and the unique context from which our data were collected, however, we also expect to find new goals that have not been identified by previous research. Although existing ERS frameworks developed with families of color provide useful starting points, the historical status and positionality of Whites in the United States are likely to result in ERS goals that are qualitatively different than those identified by previous research (Loyd & Gaither, 2018). For example, issues such as promoting racial allyship, understanding racial privilege, and navigating racial guilt have not been described in existing ERS models, but they are likely to be present among our sample.

In addition to articulating the themes of White parents’ ERS goals, we will examine the extent to which goals within each theme are limited to what Hagerman (2014) and others have called racial “happy talk.” Although we expect parents in our sample to have racial goals for their children, these aspirations may be limited to superficial or “feel-good” aspects of race, and parents may shy away from deeper and more upsetting aspects of race (Andersen, 1999). Even within potentially serious themes, parents’ aims might range along this continuum. For example, within a goal of understanding racism, some parents might focus on historical (rather than contemporary) racism and the successes of the civil rights movement, whereas other parents might focus on the ongoing systems of power and oppression that contribute to today’s racism (Vittrup, 2018). In describing the ERS goals that our sample of parents articulated, therefore, we were attuned to this potential range of goals.

For children to thrive in our increasingly diverse society, they must be prepared to engage with issues of race and racism (Spencer, 2006). Decades of research have examined the critical issues of how children who are minoritized by society’s racial hierarchy come to understand and cope with racial issues (Hughes et al., 2006; Umaña-Taylor & Hill, 2020). It is also essential, however, to understand racial development among children who are privileged by their societal context (Derman-Sparks & Phillips, 1997). Parents are one of the most powerful socializers of children (Perez-Felkner, 2020), yet developmental research has largely acted as though White families’ socialization is “race-neutral” (cf. Hamm, 2001; Lesane-Brown et al., 2010). By examining White parents’ racial goals, the current study adds to an emerging body of ERS research that focuses on how White children learn about race (e.g., Hagerman, 2014; Pahlke et al., 2012; Underhill, 2018; Vittrup, 2018; Zucker & Patterson, 2018).

Method

Participants and Recruitment

Parents were recruited from an independent school that serves students in Kindergarten through eighth grade. The school is tuition-based, and approximately 40% of the students receive financial aid. The school is religiously affiliated, and although it is primarily secular in practice, its mission includes several core values (one of which is social justice), and these values are woven throughout the curriculum. At the time of data collection, the school served 154 students from 114 families, and approximately one-third of the students identified as children of color.

The school is located in the Minneapolis–Saint Paul metropolitan area (the “Twin Cities”) of Minnesota. The Twin Cities are home to approximately 660,000 people: 56% White, 18% Black, 1% Indigenous, 11% Asian American, 9% Latinx, and 5% Multiracial (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010). Politically, the Twin Cities are very progressive (Bloch et al., 2018), and they are also characterized by extreme racial segregation (CensusScope, 2000). In addition, the Twin Cities have some of the worst economic and educational racial opportunity gaps in the country (Ingraham, 2020). Data for this study were collected in the second half of 2018, two years before the death of George Floyd sparked protests nationwide, but two years after the police killing of another Black Minnesotan, Philando Castile.

In April 2018, recruitment packets were distributed to all families currently enrolled at the school, inviting them to take part in a study seeking to “understand how families think and talk about race and other sensitive issues.” The study included three parts: a parent interview, a parent survey, and a child survey. Of 114 eligible families, 95 (83.3%) returned consent forms, and of these, 59 (62.1%) consented to participate in at least some part(s) of the study.

Data for the current study include 35 families who agreed to be interviewed and met the following criteria: all primary caregivers identified as White, and there was at least one White child in the household. In 31 of these families, all members of the household identified as White, and in the remaining four families, one sibling identified as a person of color (e.g., an adopted child or a multiracial child). Interviewed parents were 32–68 years old (M = 45.6, SD = 6.5), and most were mothers (n = 31). One parent was a sole caregiver, 32 parents shared caregiving responsibilities with one other person, and two parents shared caregiving with two other people (e.g., a current spouse and an ex-spouse). Parents had high educational attainment, reporting that they “graduated from college” (n = 9), completed “some medical, law, or graduate school” (n = 2), or “graduated from medical, law, or graduate school” (n = 23). Annual incomes ranged from “US$25,001–US$50,000” to “more than US$750,000” (median = “US$100,000–150,000”). Finally, study participants lived in 21 different zip codes spread across the cities, with the percentages of White residents ranging from 30% to 98% (M = 68.5, SD = 15.7). Most families had one (n = 13) or two children (n = 20), but one family had three, and one family had four children. When siblings attended the recruitment school, one White child was randomly designated as the “target child” for the interview. Target children ranged in age from 5 years to 14 years (M = 10.1, SD = 2.8) and included 20 boys, 15 girls, and 0 nonbinary kids.

Research Team

Cari and Virginia, professors at teaching-focused institutions, were the primary investigators and interviewers for this study. Cari is a White woman who, at the time of the study, was in her late 30s and was a parent of a White, 7-year-old son who attended the recruitment school. Virginia is an Asian American woman who, at the time of the study, was in her mid-30s. During data analyses, the research team also included two advanced graduate students in their 20s—Taylor (a White woman) and Asya (a Black woman). In addition to being from diverse racial backgrounds, the research team also brought diverse experiences to the project. For example, Virginia and Asya have studied ERS among families from many racial backgrounds, and Cari and Taylor are familiar with the Twin Cities and have studied racial and ethnic identity development among children. Prior to and throughout coding, we discussed potential biases that could affect our analyses. As a White parent and a member of the recruitment community, for example, Cari discussed potentially assuming best intentions from participants and feeling defensive on their behalf. As suggested by Hill et al. (2005), we changed partnerships throughout the coding process and rotated the order of who shared their thoughts during coding discussions as a means to lessen the effects of these biases and the power differentials within the team.

Interviews

A semi-structured interview protocol was used to elicit participants’ ERS goals, practices, and motivations (see Appendix A). We included direct questions (e.g., What are your goals or hopes for your child in terms of their racial attitudes?) and hypothetical situations that served as indirect questions (e.g., If your child asked you about police violence toward Black people, what would you do?). Although questions initially focused on the target child, parents were invited to explain if and how their responses would differ if they were focusing on their other child(ren). Interviews took place at times and locations chosen by the participants. Most interviews were conducted in person, but some were conducted via videoconference. Interviewers were assigned by availability, without regard to interviewer race or any other characteristic. Typical interviews lasted about an hour (M = 64.4, SD = 14.3, range = 41–98 minutes). All participants gave permission to have their voices recorded, and these recordings were transcribed verbatim and de-identified.

Interviews were analyzed using the Consensual Qualitative Research procedure (Hill et al., 2005). After reading transcripts several times, we identified all excerpts that referenced parents’ ERS goals. Then, we developed a list of domains that captured recurring themes within these excerpts. Domains and their definitions were revised iteratively—after coming to consensus on a randomly selected subset of excerpts, we applied a working list of domains to a new randomly selected subgroup of excerpts. When existing domains did not adequately describe the new cases, we made adjustments. Next, we worked in pairs to identify sub-themes within each domain. Finally, we again used an iterative process to cross-analyze these sub-themes and to develop accurate yet parsimonious characterizations of each goal domain. Auditing was accomplished by having each pair’s work checked by the other pair of researchers.

Results

Defining Ethnic-Racial Socialization Goals

When identifying ERS goal excerpts, we focused on instances where parents discussed their hopes for their children in terms of race-related thoughts (e.g., taking others’ perspectives), emotions (e.g., do not feel guilty), attitudes (e.g., feel positive toward people of color), values (e.g., appreciate diversity), and behaviors (e.g., be an ally). Although we focused on parents’ explicit ERS goals, we also included excerpts where the racial component was referenced indirectly (e.g., “be good neighbors”). For the four families where the White target child had a sibling of color, we only focused on parents’ goals for the White child in particular.

Goal Domains

In characterizing parents’ ERS goals, we identified 11 goal domains, presented later in the text by frequency, which comprised 27 sub-themes (see Table 1). Sub-themes were not mutually exclusive, so frequencies sum to more than the number of families within each domain. On average, each interview contained just over nine different sub-themes (M = 9.4, SD = 3.3, range = 4–17). A t-test indicated that participant interviews contained a similar number of sub-themes, regardless of whether they were conducted by the White (M = 9.8, SD = 3.1) or Asian American (M = 8.9, SD = 3.5) interviewer (t(33) = 0.86, p = 0.398). In addition, a series of chi-square tests indicated that the proportion of families who reported each sub-theme was similar across the two interviewers (χ²s ranged from 0.02 to 3.54, ps ranged from 0.060 to 0.903).

Table 1.

Parents’ ERS Goal Sub-themes: Frequencies and Correlations.

Domain (N)	Sub-theme (n)	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	17	18	19	20	21	22	23	24	25
Privilege Awareness (27)	1. awareness (22)
Privilege Awareness (27)	2. responsibility (13)
Take Action (27)	3. vague (22)	−0.10	0.35
	4. specific - proximal (7)	0.09	0.36
	5. specific - distal (3)	0.02	−0.02
Racism (26)	6. general awareness (21)	0.34	0.15	0.22	0.12	0.04
	7. systemic awareness (11)	0.01	0.12	0.27	0.28	0.23
	8. no history (20)	−0.07	−0.05	0.41	−0.14	0.27
	9. yes history (15)	0.55	0.17	0.19	.29	−0.06
Value Diversity (24)	10. exposure (16)	−0.13	0.01	0.11	−0.03	−0.28	0.05	−0.25	−0.13	0.02
	11. comfort (10)	−0.04	−0.09	0.09	−0.16	0.03	0.26	−.02	−.09	0.22
	12. appreciation (9)	− 0.50	−0.05	−0.22	0.20	0.05	.32	.02	−0.02	− 0.38
	13. benefits (7)	0.09	−0.09	0.24	−0.07	−0.15	0.18	0.28	0.14	0.00
Egalitarianism (24)	14. be a good person (14)	0.02	−0.27	0.02	−0.12	−0.25	0.17	−0.18	−.24	.00	. 42	.13	−.21	0.18
Egalitarianism (24)	15. see people as people (19)	0.24	−0.24	−0.11	−0.26	0.28	0.16	−0.12	−0.22	−0.02	−0.08	0.20	0.15	0.03
Children Lead (18)	16. next generation (13)	−0.14	0.27	0.35	−0.24	−0.02	0.22	−0.01	0.07	−0.19	−0.11	−0.09	−0.05	0.06	0.22	0.11
Children Lead (18)	17. own racial journey (9)	−0.22	0.09	0.05	−0.13	0.05	0.19	.31	0.11	−0.25	−0.15	0.06	−0.05	−0.13	0.05	0.02
Informed (18)	18. general engagement (16)	0.11	0.13	0.23	−0.17	−0.08	0.19	0.12	−0.02	0.13	−0.04	0.05	−0.28	−0.17	0.07	0.15	0.24	0.12
Informed (18)	19. critical thinking (7)	0.24	0.06	0.09	0.29	−.15	0.12	0.28	.14	0.43	0.26	0.16	−0.13	0.11	0.18	0.03	−0.24	0.03
Embracing (17)	20. internal work (14)	0.02	−0.02	0.02	0.18	0.38	0.19	0.33	.24	0.12	−0.05	0.26	0.05	0.18	−0.07	−0.07	−0.15	0.05	0.07	0.18
Embracing (17)	21. humility (12)	0.06	0.07	0.31	0.09	0.42	0.22	0.29	.26	0.10	−0.06	−0.06	−0.15	0.09	−0.10	−0.18	−0.06	−0.15	−0.06	−0.06
Empathy (15)	22. generic empathy (8)	0.00	−0.14	0.14	−0.10	0.08	0.11	−0.08	0.06	−0.06	0.18	−0.04	0.15	0.24	0.39	0.23	0.00	0.15	−0.09	0.24	−0.03	−0.11
Empathy (15)	23. anti-racist empathy (10)	0.22	0.17	−0.04	0.16	−0.19	0.00	0.39	0.04	0.22	0.18	0.30	−0.08	0.16	0.00	0.07	0.04	0.21	0.05	0.16	0.00	−0.06
Protection (13)	24. safety (12)	0.43	−0.18	0.06	−0.21	−0.22	0.03	−0.10	0.02	0.10	0.18	−0.06	−0.29	0.09	0.15	0.18	−0.18	−0.15	0.30	0.24	− 0.34	− 0.40	0.18	−0.06
Protection (13)	25. reputation (4)	0.09	0.10	0.09	−0.18	−0.11	0.11	−0.24	−0.05	0.05	0.03	−0.23	−0.01	0.05	−0.11	0.15	−0.09	−0.01	0.21	0.05	−0.29	−0.26	0.02	−.23
Racial Identity (12)	26. searching (7)	−0.06	0.06	−0.06	0.11	0.10	0.18	0.12	0.00	0.00	−0.03	−0.32	0.20	−0.07	−0.12	−0.12	0.06	−0.13	0.26	−0.07	0.18	0.24	−0.10	.00	−0.06	−0.18
Racial Identity (12)	27. not searching (7)	−0.06	−0.24	0.09	0.29	−0.15	0.03	0.12	0.14	0.00	−0.03	−0.32	0.03	0.11	0.18	−0.12	0.06	−0.13	−0.03	−0.07	−0.12	−0.06	0.24	−.16	0.24	−0.18

Note. Correlation coefficients in bolded italics are significant at p < 0.05.

Privilege awareness

Most parents (n = 27; 77%) wanted their children to be aware of their privilege. Within this goal, there were two sub-themes. First, many parents were content for their children to simply have a general awareness of privilege. Within this sub-theme, some parents talked about nonspecific privilege, without explaining where it came from (e.g., a mother of a third-grade boy said, “I can’t stand that kind of entitled thing, you know? I try to be pretty clear that you’re not better, you’re luckier.”). Some mentioned privileges that were not race-based, such as gender or economic privilege (e.g., a mother of a first-grade girl said, “I want her to know how good she has it. . . there are still kids who don’t have enough food at night.”). And still others discussed wanting their child to understand White privilege in particular, often including intersections between race and other identities (e.g., gender, immigrant status, and social class). For example, when a first-grade boy asked why he didn’t “feel anything” about Donald Trump, his mom responded, “Well, that could be your privilege. Like, we are a White family, and you don’t have to worry about being deported. Or you don’t have to worry about being trans in a Donald Trump world.” Even when specifically discussing race, however, goals in this sub-theme were indeterminate. A mother of a seventh-grade boy, for example, wanted “to make sure that [he] understands his power and privilege just by the nature of who he was born.”

Second, for some parents who mentioned privilege, mere awareness was not good enough; they wanted their child to feel a responsibility to do something about their privilege:

I think parents of White males have a profound responsibility. . . to help them understand that they’re gonna inherit a space that. . . has privileged you. And if you want to be a part of that, you’re going to have to build some stamina around that.

—Mother of seventh-grade boy

Despite feeling strongly that privilege begets responsibility, many of these parents were at a loss about exactly what this “responsibility” entailed and what to do about their White privilege. Parents who could articulate concrete actions are described in the next domain.

Take Action

Many parents (n = 27; 77%) wanted their children to take some action to confront or dismantle racism. These parents expressed a desire for their White children to improve racial equity and justice in society. For example, the mother of a fourth-grade boy explained to her child that the “world is broken and there’s a tiny piece that everyone can fix,” and mothers of sixth- and eighth-grade boys both explicitly stated that inaction supports the racist status quo. The specific actions that parents advocated were typically vague (e.g., “show support,” “stand up for others,” “be part of the solution,” and “just kind of be more in a position to take that next step toward acting”). When parents were more explicit, they mostly shared goals for children to address racism within their proximal settings (e.g., “be ready to [be] an ally to [your friend] if something happens,” and when you see racism, there are “two different ways to stand up. . . telling a responsible adult, and saying, ‘That’s racist, that’s not okay.’”). A few parents hoped that their children would address racism in more systemic, distal settings (e.g., “we write letters, we call people—our elected people up” and “we need to write bills, we need to promote candidates who are going to do the right thing, and getting involved and voting.”).

Racism

A majority of parents (n = 26; 74%) wanted their children to understand something about racism, yet their exact goals differed along two dimensions. The first dimension was whether or not parents emphasized the systemic nature of racism. Some parents did not mention systems and only wanted their children to have a general awareness of racism (e.g., “[I] explain that we don’t live in an equal society, and that certain people, because of the color of their skin, have this immediate disadvantage.” –mother of Kindergarten boy). Other parents wanted their children to know that racism is a system of power and oppression:

[I] let them know that people aren’t treated equally in our systems, and a lot of our systems really are unfair to especially people of color and set up in a way that don’t support, and sometimes really hurt, other people.

—Mother of seventh-grade girl

The second distinction was whether parents included historical understanding as part of their goal. Among parents whose goal was a general awareness of racism, those who also mentioned history wanted their children to understand the history of racism, itself (e.g., “There’s been a long history in this country of White people not thinking Black people are fully human, going back to slavery, and that’s still not gotten resolved.”—mother of sixth-grade boy). Parents who had discussed systems of racism and also mentioned history used history to explain those systems:

We kind of link it all the way back to, historically, if African-Americans were slaves. And then there were systems put in place that didn’t allow them to own property, get jobs, everything else, and that they still don’t have the access—the equal access to basic things. That’s sort of what’s brought it to this point.

—Mother of seventh-grade boy

Aside from these two dimensions, there were two other consistent qualities of this domain. First, although the exact language varied (some parents directly used the word “racism,” whereas other parents referred to “unfair treatment”), all of the parents were clear that the unfair treatment was race-based (e.g., “there is unjustness when it comes to the way in which rules are enforced and applied to people with brown and black skin” and “there’s been some things that have happened where Black people are still being treated differently than White people.”). Second, almost all of the parents externalized racism (i.e., they discussed racism as something that others perpetrated). Only two parents discussed wanting their children to understand their own role in racism:

There are some things that happen in the world that were created for the sake of some people and not for others. . . try to identify that those structures and systems that are in place, and where he fits in that, and why he fits where he does.

—Mother of Kindergarten boy

Value diversity

Approximately two-thirds of families (n = 24; 69%) included valuing diversity as an ERS goal. For many, this goal was implicit in their hope that their children have exposure to diversity:

I love taking him [to a jazz festival] and just exposing him to people who are all in our neighborhood. And they don’t look like—they have a huge variety of people—they don’t look like him or I.

—Mother of Kindergarten boy

For others, exposure to diversity was a means for their children to develop racial comfort, racial appreciation, or other benefits. Parents who mentioned racial comfort hoped that their children would “tolerate,” “be open to,” or “welcome” differences. These parents wanted to normalize differences in order to prevent wariness or negative reactions that can result from unfamiliarity:

I want him to not be leery or afraid of “the other” or feel threatened by people who look different than he is. . . We all have different ways of approaching the world, different cultures, and different beliefs, but not to be threatened by that.

—Mother of Kindergarten boy

Some parents wanted their children to go beyond comfort, to respect diversity and appreciate the beauty and value that are inherent in everyone (e.g., “We are all diverse, and none of us look alike. None of us share the same things, and we’re all beautiful of the different shades and colors that we have.”—mother of seventh-grade girl). Finally, some parents wanted their children to understand that diversity has benefits, either to them as individuals or to society as a whole. For example, parents mentioned that diversity reduces racial stereotypes, leads to a “more fun and more interesting” life, and helps develop “compassion and understanding.”

Most parents clearly valued racial diversity, in particular (e.g., “I want to make sure that he knows he’s a part of a community with many different races and cultures present.”—mother of first-grade boy). Some parents, however, never specified the type of diversity they sought (e.g., “I want them to see all kinds of people living their lives.”—mother of fourth-grade girl). Even among the parents who did mention racial diversity, it was common to also mention other forms of diversity (e.g., ideological, sexuality, national origin, cultural, and socio-economic).

Egalitarianism

Approximately two-thirds of parents (n = 24; 69%) had egalitarian goals and wanted their children to value individual characteristics over race. For some, egalitarianism was expressed as a general goal of wanting their child to be a good person, which included being “tolerant,” “respectful,” “a good friend,” “kind,” and not making “assumptions” or “prejudging people.” For example, a father of a fifth-grade girl said, “I hope that we raise race-conscious, very open-minded, very inclusive, nonjudgmental kids.”

Most parents, however, specifically wanted their children to see people as people—to be able to appreciate individual differences within and between groups, to be able to look past group membership when forming relationships, and to avoid stereotyping:

We’ve always just encouraged her to be friends with whoever and go play with whoever. . . I also don’t want [her] to look at people as groups or as like, “because you’re Hmong, you’re this way. And because you’re African American, you’re this way.”

—Mother of seventh-grade girl

Within this sub-theme, however, there were further nuances. For some, seeing people as people was rooted in colorblindness. For example, a mother of a first-grade girl hoped that her child “truly doesn’t see skin color, sees people for who they are, sees character. . . it really doesn’t matter. What matters is what’s underneath.” Yet, for others, seeing people as people was rooted in color awareness. For example, a mother of a sixth-grade boy wanted him to know that, “everyone is equal, but people aren’t being treated equally.” Finally, for some parents, seeing people as people was linked to maintaining relationships despite differences in opinion. These remarks typically involved police officers (e.g., “not all [of] them, but there are some racist police officers just like there are racist people in all parts of our society.”—father of fifth-grade girl) or family members who had expressed racist comments or differing beliefs (e.g., “We talk about grandpa. . . we still love him even though he voted for Trump.”—mother of eighth-grade girl).

Children lead the way

Just over half of the parents (n = 18; 51%) expressed a goal of having their children take the lead on racial issues. This goal had two sub-themes. First, many parents wanted their children to be part of the next generation of racial progress. Some parents discussed this goal generally (e.g., “My goal is that [racial injustice] would stop in the next generation.”—mother of seventh-grade girl; “My hope is that he’ll be a kiddo that grows up and is different, and hopes to make things different.”—mother of second-grade boy). Other parents discussed this goal in relation to themselves, describing their own perceived racial shortcomings and hoping that their children would be more advanced on these issues. For example, a mother of a fourth-grade girl shared, “one of my goals is for that whole system to be less invisible to them then it was to me growing up.” Another parent said:

What I didn’t understand until I was way too old was, kind of, the system versus the individual. Like, I was brought up as sort of, “Ok, you’re not a Klan member, so you’re not a racist.” And it took me several decades to realize there’s more to it than that. And so, we’re kind of trying to give [our children] a boost with that.

—Mother of fourth-grade boy

Second, some parents wanted their children to be active participants in their own racial journey. Sometimes, these parents were unsure about the racial goals for their child (e.g., “My goal for him is to be on a journey to his own racial awareness. . . I don’t have an endpoint for him because I don’t know what the endpoint would even be.”—mother of fifth-grade boy). Other times, these parents specifically wanted their children to have agency in their own development (e.g., “I want her to be who she wants to be. . . In fact, I feel like I spend a lot of time trying not to tell her who to be because I think it’s really necessary for her to figure it out.”—mother of seventh-grade girl).

Informed

About half of the parents (n = 18; 51%) wanted their children to be informed about race. Within this goal, a majority of parents expressed a sub-theme of general engagement with race—wanting their children to be open to learning about race and to “be curious about racial and cultural differences.” These parents acknowledged that children naturally notice racial differences, and they aimed to honestly answer their children’s racial questions. As a mother of a Kindergarten boy said, “I’m trying to . . . not heap on the shame and guilt for experiencing the world and having questions about it.” Although many parents in this sub-theme tended toward colorblindness, they also recognized that colorblindness would not address racial inequities:

What do you see—a difference or not? ‘Cause I would love it in some ways if he didn’t. [But] it’s unsafe to not see a difference right now. . . You have to be mindful of what’s going on so that you can help to make a difference. If everything was equal out in the world, then it would be okay and acceptable, maybe, to [not see race]. But, because it’s not that way, I think that it needs to be in the forefront.

—Mother of fourth-grade boy

A smaller subset of parents expressed a goal of critical thinking—desiring their children to be “informed consumers” and to ask deep questions about sources of racial information:

[I want her to be] aware of when something’s being presented to her as, you know, status quo, or “these are facts.” Whose interests are behind this? Whose interests are being served? And asking questions about it.

—Mother of first-grade girl

They’re exposed to so much through social media. . . I want them to really understand the things they’re seeing and not just these images. And really understand what it’s all about. . . and to be able to see different perspectives.

—Mother of seventh-grade girl

A few parents stressed the importance of understanding the “complexity” of race, criticizing racial education for exerting a “heavy-handed, simplistic, liberal approach” that pushed children to adopt reactionary, politically correct values without grasping the reasoning behind the values:

You know, he’s like, instinctively, knee-jerky, anti-Donald Trump, which is fine, ‘cause, I mean, [sarcastically] I don’t know where he got that from. But sometimes I also don’t want that to just be the scapegoat, you know what I mean? “Well, that’s just dumb because Trump—” Like, no, let’s think about why this particular thing is dumb.

—Mother of third-grade boy

Embracing the difficulty of being anti-racist

Almost half of our sample’s parents (n = 17; 49%) wanted to raise anti-racist children who could move past feelings of discomfort to have honest conversations about race and racism. Two sub-themes emerged. First, internal work represents parents’ desires for their children to be able to regulate the emotions that naturally arise when learning about racism. As the mother of a sixth-grade boy stated, “I don’t think it’s that helpful to be just, like, drowning in shame or guilt.” These parents sensed that feeling overwhelmed could deter their children from moving forward on racial issues, and they wanted their children to be willing to have these tough conversations:

I was raised with much more of the theory of “I see no colors.” And, I think that that can be damaging, because then you don’t have those important conversations. I mean, they can be frictional, sometimes, and uncomfortable—really uncomfortable—because, you know, I mean, now I have to sit and look at what my biases are, and where my racism lies. . . . I want [my children] to really be able to feel comfortable talking about that even in—comfortable in their discomfort. Comfortable taking that step up and being able to see the differences and talk about it and know that that’s okay.

—Mother of second-grade boy

Second, many of these parents sought to normalize making mistakes while developing racial awareness (i.e., learning racial humility). These parents wanted their children to know that becoming anti-racist is not easy, but that their family is committed to this “life-long process”:

I hope what we can do is just say, “We are a safe space. You can say whatever you want to us, and we can talk about whether it’s appropriate. ‘Cause he needs to be able to make mistakes too. Because that’s just the reality of life—you’re not always going to get it right, you’re not going to get the language right. . . So, if he can do that in a space where we can gently correct, I think he’ll be better off.

—Mother of Kindergarten boy

I’m hoping that as they get older, I want them to. . . kind of have that. . . what is it?. . . Humility?—which I didn’t really have much of and still don’t of,—”I’m not going to get this right all the time. I’m going to say stuff that hurts my friends of color.” Or “I’m going to make mistakes. Just like I do in everything else.”

—Mother of fourth-grade boy

These parents were also transparent that racial learning is challenging for adults too, and they wanted to reassure their children that they were not alone, and that they would figure it out together. As the mother of a seventh-grade boy said, “White fragility can no longer be an excuse or a reason to opt out. You’re just going to have to own it and not personalize it.”

Empathy

A sizable minority of parents (n = 15; 43%) wanted their children to have racial empathy—to understand others’ racial perspectives and experiences. For some of these parents, generic empathy was the extent of this goal. For example, the mother of a third-grade boy wanted her child to “understand different people’s perspectives and to be aware of different people’s perceptions.” Generic empathy also included wanting children to understand the intent (rather than impact) of a racist or offensive comment (e.g., “Tell me more, why’d you say that, help us understand that.”—mother of sixth-grade girl).

Most of these parents, however, wanted their children to develop empathy with the purpose of being anti-racist. These parents wanted their children to understand how others’ racial histories, including experiences of racism or trauma, have influenced them:

I don’t want her to learn about social justice or racism or whatever from a White, kind of, savior lens. I want her to have friends who show her what it means to live in this country and have a different skin.

—Mother of Kindergarten girl

It’s really important to stop, put yourself in the other person’s shoes, think about how that might be different for this person experiencing an encounter with the police officer, or a border guard, as opposed to you as a White girl.

—Father of third-grade girl

These parents focused on helping their children understand the impact of their words and actions, including the mother of a fourth-grade boy who wanted her son to avoid “blindness to the impact of what you’re saying. . . maybe just trying to be funny and not realizing that what [you’re] saying is hurtful and offensive.” These parents also wanted their children to understand that there are limits to empathy, that they will never truly understand the experiences of people of color.

Protection

Just over a third of parents (n = 13; 37%) wanted to protect their children from racial discomfort. Two sub-themes emerged. First, almost all of these parents expressed a desire to protect their child’s physical, emotional, or psychological safety. These parents often wanted to address racial issues with their children, but they worried about the consequences:

When you’re trying to teach somebody who is gonna be a White guy about oppression, it’s really tricky to get a balance between them not feeling like shit about themselves, and at the same time, being aware of all this stuff. . . How does he just relax and enjoy life or enjoy a movie or enjoy whatever, but at the same time see all that stuff. . . If you really hammer home all those things, then when does he feel good about himself, and what is there in life to enjoy?”

—Mother of sixth-grade boy

Some parents also worried about exposing their children to developmentally inappropriate information (e.g., “We try to not talk about things that are too disturbing in front of the kids.”—father of third-grade girl). Second, a few parents wanted to protect their child’s reputation. These parents articulated some anti-racist ideas, but they were primarily focused on the appearance of not being racist:

You do it to be really careful what you say, you know? And maybe you feel like you shouldn’t have to be so careful, but you never quite know what’s gonna offend somebody. Which is hard for a kid to process, right?

—Mother of sixth-grade girl

Racial and Ethnic Identity

Approximately one-third of parents (n = 12; 34%) articulated goals regarding their children’s racial or ethnic identities. Within this goal, sub-themes reflected Marcia’s (1966) identity statuses. Some parents expressed moratorium-like goals—they were actively searching for White identities. These parents were unsure what it means to be White in the United States, and they were still exploring their goals for their children’s (and their own) racial identities:

I’d want her to be happy with who she is. . . to understand what it means to be White in this country and the power that you get just from being that, but that’s a really hard topic to teach. I don’t know how to; I’m struggling with that myself.

—Mother of fifth-grade girl

Often, these parents were seeking sources of pride or White identities that were not associated with oppression:

[I hope that] we can work as a family to re-engage with some of the cultural pieces that have been lost. . . I’d like to re-engage with some positive aspects of specific culture within our ancestry.

—Mother of seventh-grade boy

Other parents were not searching for a White identity, and instead, had various other goals for their children’s racial identification. These other goals included just being happy with themselves (i.e., identity diffusion) and understanding the role that their family’s heritage plays in their lives (i.e., achieved identity):

The goal is that he develops an awareness, but at the same time giving him a sense of self-esteem and feeling good about himself as a person.

—Mother of fourth-grade boy

I want him to know that he’s part of—that he has culture, too. And that he’s a part of more than just being White. . . And making sure that I’m giving him opportunities to learn about our family’s history and our family’s background.

—Mother of first-grade boy

Happy Talk versus Racial Realities

As suspected, sub-themes spanned a range from shallow to deep engagement with racial issues. For some goal domains, all sub-themes fell on one side of this continuum. Within protection, for example, both sub-themes were about avoiding racial discomfort, which is a hallmark of racial happy talk, and within embracing the difficulty of being anti-racist, both sub-themes represented the opposite of racial happy talk—leaning into the hard work of racial progress (DiAngelo, 2011; Hagerman, 2017). More often, there was a mix of shallow and deeper sub-themes within a goal domain. Within empathy, for example, one sub-theme expressed a shallower goal—parents with generic empathy goals simply wanted their children to know that “different people have different experiences and different ways of being.” The other sub-theme, empathy with the purpose of being anti-racist, represented a deeper level of engagement. For these parents, empathy was a means to social justice, and as such, these parents tended to directly address some of the reasons why people with different racial backgrounds might have different perspectives (e.g., culture, racist stereotypes, and long histories of mistreatment).

In order to examine whether there were patterns of ERS goals within families, we first created variables for each sub-theme and assigned families a “1” if that theme was present in the parent’s interview and a “0” if it was not. Then, we ran correlations between these variables (see Table 1). Given the low sample size, few correlations were significant, but the results did demonstrate that some sub-themes were grouped together within families. For example, families that wanted their children to feel a responsibility to do something about White privilege tended to also have the ERS goal of taking action to confront or dismantle racism. In addition, families that held the ERS goal of appreciating diversity were less likely to want their children to be aware of White privilege or to understand the history of racism. Overall, the pattern of correlations supported the distinction between shallow and deeper goals. For example, families that expressed shallower goals like vague awareness of privilege tended to also express other shallow goals like general awareness of racism and safety from racial discomfort. Families that expressed deeper goals like taking specific action to interrupt racism tended to also express other deep goals like learning racial humility.

Discussion

In this study, we interviewed a group of White parents, and we identified 11 domains that characterize their hopes and goals for their White children’s race-related thoughts, attitudes, emotions, values, and behaviors.

Overlap with Previous Ethnic–Racial Themes

For the most part, White families expressed ERS goals that mapped onto an existing framework that was generated to describe ERS among families of color (Hughes et al., 2006). The one exception is the children lead the way theme, which centered on children’s own interest and initiative. This goal indicates that parents understand that children construct their own knowledge, and that ERS is bidirectional. Yet, this goal may be one way that parents are sidestepping the question—parents may defer to their children’s initiative because articulating racial goals might require work that parents are not willing or able to commit to.

ERS responds to social positions and societal issues, and White parents respond to a fundamentally different social position than that of their peers of color. Although many of the goals that we observed are qualitatively different than those enumerated by previous research with families of color, we argue that goals among White families function in similar ways (e.g., promotes interracial relationships, prepares for the racial hierarchy of the United States).

Egalitarianism

Previous research suggests that egalitarianism is an especially common goal among White parents, perhaps because it is often rooted in colorblindness (Pahlke et al., 2012; Vittrup, 2018; Zucker & Patterson, 2018). As discussed earlier, however, parents in this sample tended to have color-conscious goals. Although some parents with egalitarian goals flirted with colorblindness, most of these parents wanted egalitarianism with acknowledgment of race. In addition, like their peers of color, many parents with egalitarian goals were guided by a desire for their children to develop proficiency at navigating interracial relationships (Hamm, 2001; Priest et al., 2014). Parents wanted their children to get along with other-race peers, be friends with anyone, and develop racial empathy. Parents also were motivated by anti-racism, hoping that raising children who can treat others fairly regardless of race will result in a less racist society.

Cultural socialization

Given that Whiteness is the norm in U.S. society, White families may not feel a need to emphasize their group’s heritage. Indeed, many White people reach adulthood having never thought about their own racial identity (Tatum, 2017). Very few parents in our sample had racial and ethnic identity goals for their children. White identity models (e.g., Helms, 1995) outline a twofold process of White identity development: (a) to understand Whiteness and (b) to dismantle White privilege and White supremacy. Some parents grappled with the first process—they were exploring what it means to be White for them and their children. Some parents grappled with the second process—they confronted the power and privilege that come with being White in the United States. These parents were searching for how, or if, to feel good about being White with the knowledge that they had privilege, and questions regarding their own identity led them to be unsure of what identity goals they might have for their children.

Most White parents, however, expressed a different form of cultural socialization—they wanted their children to value diversity and learn about others (Pahlke et al., 2012). Previous research suggests that many White families want their children to be exposed to diversity so that they can learn about, appreciate, and celebrate others, and this “diversity ideology” is especially prominent among economically privileged White parents (Underhill, 2018; Vittrup, 2018). In this study, parents believed that exposure to diversity (via friendships, activities, and experiences) would impart positive lessons or other benefits on their children (e.g., help them learn about the struggles of others or recognize their own privilege; Hagerman, 2017). Consistent with previous research, however, many (but not all) of our participants seemed to be more interested in superficial interracial exposure (e.g., belonging to a diverse sports league or going to cultural festivals) rather than developing deeper interracial relationships (Hamm, 2001).

Preparation for bias

Traditionally, preparation for bias messages are precautions about prejudicial treatment from others and preparation for how to cope with such treatment (Hughes et al., 2006). Although some White people report experiencing racial discrimination (Hughey, 2014), the parents in this sample wanted their White children to understand that racial discrimination happens to people of color, and that they, in contrast, have privilege. Indeed, understanding racism was a goal expressed by a majority of our participants. Previous research suggests that many White people believe that racism is a problem of the past (Bonilla-Silva & Dietrich, 2011), but when parents in this study explained the history of racism, they tended to teach their children that racial issues persist today (e.g., “racism isn’t solved because of Martin Luther King.”). In addition, previous research suggests that if White people do acknowledge the existence of racism, they consider it to be an idiosyncratic problem that exists in the hearts and minds of “ignorant” or “bigoted” individuals (Tatum, 2017). Although some parents discussed racism as an individual-level phenomenon (e.g., “some people will profile based on skin color”), most of these responses did not offer any attribution for racism. Among the participants who did give an attribution for racism, it was typically discussed as a systemic issue. Consistent with previous research involving White liberals, however, most of the parents failed to acknowledge their own role in the system (Bonilla-Silva & Dietrich, 2011). Only two of these parents implicated their own family as having a role in a racist system. When the topic turned from racism to privilege awareness, these parents did focus on their group’s own role in the racial hierarchy. However, even within this goal, parents typically spoke about racial privilege as something to be aware of, grateful for, and humble about; few parents grappled with the systemic causes of White privilege or how having and using White privilege contributes to the existence of racism.

The attributions White parents offer for racism and privilege have implications for how they envision solutions to these issues. If, for example, the root problem of our society’s racial inequities is individual in nature, then antibias training and education should be sufficient to “fix” bigoted individuals. But if racism and privilege are systemic, solutions require approaches that many White parents have difficulty seeing themselves and their children contributing to. Indeed, notions of how to address racism and privilege came up in the take action goal. Color-conscious parents often want to raise socially active children (Hagerman, 2017). In this study, the actions advocated by parents were often vague, and they typically centered on confronting racists (i.e., individual people) rather than systemic or structural problems. Despite many parents failing to provide concrete actions, most of these parents clearly believed that individuals could, and should, do something about racial inequality.

Promotion of mistrust

As expected, goals of warning children to be wary of interracial interactions were rare in this sample. However, consistent with the idea of White fragility (DiAngelo, 2011), some parents wanted to protect their children from negative emotions associated with racial discussions, and some parents wanted their children to avoid the appearance of being racist (more so than avoiding actually being racist). As DiAngelo (2011) argues, racial comfort and superficial “racial tolerance” serve to protect White people’s identity of being good, moral people because these ideas obscure the systemic racial hierarchy where White people are in power.

Indeed, the correlations between ERS goals demonstrated that parents who held protection goals were especially unlikely to also hold goals of embracing the difficulty of being anti-racist. In both the protection and the embracing goals, parents recognize that race is not an easy issue, and that dealing with it can be uncomfortable. Parents with protection goals, however, only seek to avoid this discomfort. Parents with embracing goals seek to help their children cope with this discomfort. These parents recognize that making mistakes (and learning from them) is part of the process of dismantling racism, and therefore, they ascribe to what Hagerman (2014) calls “continuous intervention,” which involves responding regularly if children share problematic ideas about race. As Matlock and DiAngelo (2015) argue, White anti-racism is an ongoing process that includes confronting White supremacy, challenging colorblindness, and engaging in meaningful action at many levels. Thus, the opposing goals of protection and embracing support the contention that White fragility is a barrier to dismantling racism (Jayakumar & Adamian, 2017).

Beyond Colorblindness

Previous studies indicate that racial colorblindness is a common goal among White families (e.g., Pahlke et al., 2012). Some White parents may emphasize colorblindness because they believe that racism is no longer an issue in U.S. society, whereas others emphasize colorblindness because they (mistakenly) believe that ignoring race will prevent racism (Bonilla-Silva & Dietrich, 2011; Zucker & Patterson, 2018). Colorblind ideology was less common among our sample. Instead, parents in this study shared more “color-conscious” goals—goals that acknowledge the importance of race in society (Vittrup, 2018). For example, parents who expressed informed goals explicitly wanted their children to be aware of and to ask questions about race. Even as a few parents suggested that colorblindness might be a goal “if everything was equal out in the world,” they recognized that racial disparities persist in our country and, therefore, they felt that colorblindness was inappropriate. In fact, many of these parents’ goals went beyond color consciousness; many parents wanted to raise children who would work to end racial inequalities and embrace the difficulty of being anti-racist.

Acknowledging the specificity of our sample (parents who sent their children to a social justice focused school and willingly took part in a study about racial issues), it is nonetheless notable that these White parents recognized the importance of race and had ERS goals that went beyond ignoring race. In addition, these parents typically did not aim to avoid difficult racial topics like racism and privilege. In taking on these difficult topics, however, parents’ goals spanned a range from shallow to deeper engagement. Indeed, although they were limited by low statistical power, the pattern of correlations among ERS goals suggests that some families tended toward multiple shallow goals (e.g., vague awareness of privilege and racism), whereas other families tended toward multiple deeper goals (e.g., embracing the difficulty of being anti-racist and taking specific action to address racism in systemic settings). Beyond this simple shallow-to-deep continuum, various goals may tend to be clustered in other ways within families. The current study lacks the sample size to address this question, so future research should seek to identify these potential constellations of related goals among White families.

Limitations and Future Directions

Our participants were self-selected from targeted recruitment of a private school that has a social justice mission; therefore, these results cannot be generalized to White parents as a whole. Parents in our sample were all very well educated, and research suggests that social class plays an important role in ERS (Hagerman, 2014). Furthermore, White families who opt in to such a school likely have different understandings of race than their peers who select other types of schools. As Goren and Plaut (2012) demonstrate, White identity can take three broad forms—weakly identified (those who accept Whiteness as the norm and do not think much about being White), prideful (those who have strong White identities and take pride in their Whiteness), and power cognizant (those who have strong White identities and recognize White privilege within society). We suspect that most of our participants would be power cognizant. If our sample had included more prideful participants, we might have seen more racial identity goals and perhaps some overtly racist goals; if our sample had included more weakly identified participants, we might have seen more color blind goals. In addition to selection effects, the school itself must be considered. Parental socialization is bidirectional (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006), and indeed, parents in our sample reported responding to issues their children learned about at school (e.g., police violence, the Dakota War) and talking to other parents from the school community about how to address these issues. Thus, the school context likely shaped parents’ ERS goals. Future research must examine ERS goals among more economically and ideologically diverse White families drawn from a wider range of contexts.

Although goals are critical components of ERS, an important next step is to examine the actual ERS practices of White parents. Regardless of goals, parents teach children through specific actions such as modeling, discussions, and explicit statements (Darling & Steinberg, 1993). Given that many White parents believe that their children are racially naïve or are not sure how to discuss race in “developmentally appropriate” ways, we suspect that parents’ practices may not always align with their goals, particularly for young children (Matlock & DiAngelo, 2015; Sullivan et al., 2020).

Finally, decades of research with families of color have demonstrated important findings about the precursors and outcomes of ERS. For example, research has shown how neighborhood characteristics, parents’ experiences, and child demographics are associated with parents’ ERS practices (Umaña-Taylor & Hill, 2020). In addition, research has shown how various ERS practices are associated with children’s identities and other psychosocial outcomes (Hughes et al., 2006). Few studies have examined similar precursors or outcomes of ERS among White families, yet the developmental importance of White children learning about race cannot be overstated. By the time they are 6 years of age, most White children demonstrate pro-White bias (Katz, 2003), and even when parents hold egalitarian racial attitudes, when these parents avoid the topic of race, their children are especially likely to demonstrate racial bias (Hagerman, 2014; Pahlke et al., 2012). Thus, questions of how specific ERS practices relate to children’s attitudes and how individual or contextual factors promote such practices are critical areas for future research.

Conclusion

Understanding ERS among White families—who benefit from the racial status quo—is an important step toward racial equity (Hagerman, 2014). Parents in our sample had clear ERS goals for their children, and although many of these goals addressed the cultural norm of Whiteness and how racism, power, and privilege operate in the United States, many goals failed to address these important issues. Such omissions may be counterproductive for parents who want to raise anti-racist children (Matlock & DiAngelo, 2015). Part of the ongoing process of being anti-racist includes personal changes (e.g., being vulnerable, continuing education, self-awareness, developing humility), taking steps to change the racial world (e.g., joining social movements, fighting the growth of alt-right groups and platforms, etc.), and engaging in actual anti-racist practices (Bonilla-Silva & Dietrich, 2011; DiAngelo, 2011). Our results suggest that some White parents are interested in having difficult dialogues that move beyond kindness and diversity to involve children in their own anti-racist journies.

Footnotes

Appendix A

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Cari Gillen-O’Neel

References

Andersen

M. L.

(1999). The fiction of diversity without oppression: Race, ethnicity, identity, and power. In Tai

Kenyatta

(Eds.), Critical ethnicity: Countering the waves of identity politics (pp. 5–20). Rowman and Littlefield.

Bloch

Buchanan

Katz

Quealy

(2018, July 25). An extremely detailed map of the 2016 election. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com

Bonilla-Silva

Dietrich

(2011). The sweet enchantment of color-blind racism in Obamerica. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 634, 190–206. https://dx-doi-org-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1177/0002716210389702

Bronfenbrenner

Morris

P. A.

(2006). The bioecological model of human development. In Lerner

R. M.

Damon

(Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Theoretical models of human development (pp. 793–828). John Wiley & Sons Inc.

CensusScope. (2000). Segregation: Neighborhood exposure by race. http://www.censusscope.org

Darling

Steinberg

(1993). Parenting style as context: An integrative model. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 487–496. https://dx-doi-org-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1037/0033-2909.113.3.487

Derman-Sparks

Phillips

C. B.

(1997). Teaching/learning anti-racism: A developmental approach. Teachers College Press.

DiAngelo

(2011). White fragility. International Journal of Critical Pedagogy, 3, 54–70.

Goren

M. J.

Plaut

V. C.

(2012). Identity form matters: White racial identity and attitudes toward diversity. Self and Identity, 11, 237–254. https://dx-doi-org-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1080/15298868.2011.556804

10.

Hagerman

M. A.

(2014). White families and race: Colour-blind and colour-conscious approaches to white racial socialization. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 37, 2598–2614. https://dx-doi-org-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1080/01419870.2013.848289

11.

Hagerman

M. A.

(2017). White racial socialization: Progressive fathers on raising “antiracist” children. Journal of Marriage and Family, 79, 60–74. https://dx-doi-org-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1111/jomf.12325

12.

Hamm

J. V.

(2001). Barriers and bridges to positive cross-ethnic relations: African American and White parent socialization beliefs and practices. Youth & Society, 33, 62–98. https://dx-doi-org-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1177/0044118x01033001003

13.

Helms

J. E.

(1995). An update of Helm’s White and people of color racial identity models. In Ponterotto

J. G.

Casas

J. M.

Suzuki

L. A.

Alexander

C. M.

Ponterotto

J. G.

Casas

J. M.

Suzuki

L. A.

Alexander

C. M.

(Eds.), Handbook of multicultural counseling (pp. 181–198). Sage.

14.

Hill

C. E.

Knox

Thompson

B. J.

Williams

E. N.

Hess

S. A.

Ladany

(2005). Consensual qualitative research: An update. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 196–205. https://dx-doi-org-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.196

15.

Hughes

Rodriguez

Smith

E. P.

Johnson

D. J.

Stevenson

H. C.

Spicer

(2006). Parents’ ethnic-racial socialization practices: A review of research and directions for future study. Developmental Psychology, 42, 747–770. https://dx-doi-org-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1037/0012-1649.42.5.747

16.

Hughey

M. W.

(2014). White backlash in the ‘post-racial’ United States. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 37, 721–730. https://dx-doi-org-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1080/01419870.2014.886710

17.

Ingraham

(2020, May 30). Racial inequality in Minneapolis is among the worst in the nation. https://www.washingtonpost.com

18.

Jackson

III

R. L. Heckman

S. M.

(2002). Perceptions of White identity and White liability: An analysis of White student responses to a college campus racial hate crime. Journal of Communication, 52, 434–450. https://dx-doi-org-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2002.tb02554.x

19.

Jayakumar

U. M.

Adamian

A. S.

(2017). The fifth frame of colorblind ideology: Maintaining the comforts of colorblindness in the context of white fragility. Sociological Perspectives, 60, 912–936. https://dx-doi-org-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1177/0731121417721910

20.

Katz

P. A.

(2003). Racists or tolerant multiculturalists? How do they begin? American Psychologist, 58, 897–909. https://dx-doi-org-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1037/0003-066X.58.11.897

21.

Lesane-Brown

C. L.

Brown

T. N.

Tanner-Smith

E. E.

Bruce

M. A.

(2010). Negotiating boundaries and bonds: Frequency of young children’s socialization to their ethnic/racial heritage. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 41, 457–464. https://dx-doi-org-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1177/0022022109359688

22.

Loyd

A. B.

Gaither

S. E.

(2018). Racial/ethnic socialization for white youth: What we know and future directions. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 59. https://dx-doi-org-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1016/j.appdev.2018.05.004

23.

Marcia

J. E.

(1966). Development and validation of ego-identity status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3, 551–558. https://dx-doi-org-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1037/h0023281

24.

Matlock

S. A.

DiAngelo

(2015). “We put it in terms of not-nice”: White antiracists and parenting. Journal of Progressive Human Services, 26, 67–92. https://dx-doi-org-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1080/10428232.2015.977836

25.

Neblett

E. W.

Rivas-Drake

Umaña-Taylor

A. J.

(2012). The promise of racial and ethnic protective factors in promoting ethnic minority youth development. Child Development Perspectives, 6, 295–303. https://dx-doi-org-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1111/j.1750-8606.2012.00239.x

26.

Neville

H. A.

Awad

G. H.

Brooks

J. E.

Flores

M. P.

Bluemel

(2013). Color-blind racial ideology: Theory, training, and measurement implications in psychology. American Psychologist, 68, 455–466. https://dx-doi-org-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1037/a0033282

27.

Norton

M. I.

Sommers

S. R.

(2011). Whites see racism as a zero-sum game that they are now losing. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 215–218. https://dx-doi-org-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1177/1745691611406922

28.

Pahlke

Bigler

R. S.

Suizzo

M. A.

(2012). Relations between colorblind socialization and children’s racial bias: Evidence from European American mothers and their preschool children. Child Development, 83, 1164–1179. https://dx-doi-org-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01770.x

29.

Perez-Felkner

(2020). Socialization in childhood and adolescence. In DeLamater

Ward

(Eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology (2nd ed., pp. 119–149). Springer Publishing.

30.

Priest

Walton

White

Kowal

Baker

Paradies

(2014). Understanding the complexities of ethnic-racial socialization processes for both minority and majority groups: A 30-year systematic review. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 43, 139–155. https://dx-doi-org-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2014.08.003

31.

Schwartz

S. J. S.

Moin Yip

Knight

G. P.

Umaña-Taylor

A. J.

Rivas-Drake

Lee

R. M.

(2014). Methodological issues in ethnic and racial identity research with ethnic minority populations: Theoretical precision, measurement issues, and research designs. Child Development, 85, 58–76. https://dx-doi-org-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1111/cdev.12201

32.

Spanierman

L. B.

Heppner

M. J.

(2004). Psychosocial Costs of Racism to Whites Scale (PCRW): Construction and initial validation. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51, 249–262. https://dx-doi-org-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1037/0022-0167.51.2.249

33.

Spencer

M. B.

(2006). Phenomenology and ecological systems theory: Development of diverse groups. In Lerner

R. M.

Damon

Lerner

R. M.

Damon

(Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Theoretical models of human development (pp. 829–893). John Wiley & Sons Inc.

34.

Sullivan

Wilton

Apfelbaum

E. P.

(2020). Adults delay conversations about race because they underestimate children’s processing of race. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. https://dx-doi-org-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1037/xge0000851

35.

Tatum

B. D.

(2017). Why are all the Black kids sitting together in the Cafeteria? (2nd ed.). Basic Books.

36.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2010). QuickFacts: St. Paul city, Minneapolis city, Minnesota; United States. https://www.census.gov

37.

Umaña-Taylor

A. J.

Hill

N. E.

(2020). Ethnic–racial socialization in the family: A decade’s advance on precursors and outcomes. Journal of Marriage and Family, 82, 244–271. https://dx-doi-org-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1111/jomf.12622

38.

Underhill

M. R.

(2018). “Diversity is important to me”: White parents and exposure-to-diversity parenting practices. Sociology of Race and Ethnicity, 5, 486–499. https://dx-doi-org-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1177/2332649218790992

39.

Vittrup

(2018). Color blind or color conscious? White American mothers’ approaches to racial socialization. Journal of Family Issues, 39, 668–692. https://dx-doi-org-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1177/0192513X16676858

40.

Zucker

J. K.

Patterson

M. M.

(2018). Racial socialization practices among White American parents: Relations to racial attitudes, racial identity, and school diversity. Journal of Family Issues, 39, 3903–3930. https://dx-doi-org-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1177/0192513X18800766

From Kindness and Diversity to Justice and Action: White Parents’ Ethnic–Racial Socialization Goals

Abstract

Keywords

Ethnic–Racial Socialization Goals

Current Study

Method

Participants and Recruitment

Research Team

Interviews

Results

Defining Ethnic-Racial Socialization Goals

Goal Domains

Privilege awareness

Take Action

Racism

Value diversity

Egalitarianism

Children lead the way

Informed

Embracing the difficulty of being anti-racist

Empathy

Protection

Racial and Ethnic Identity

Happy Talk versus Racial Realities

Discussion

Overlap with Previous Ethnic–Racial Themes

Egalitarianism

Cultural socialization

Preparation for bias

Promotion of mistrust

Beyond Colorblindness

Limitations and Future Directions

Conclusion

Footnotes

Appendix A

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

ORCID iDs

References