Abstract
This qualitative study explored the experiences of transracial Chinese adoptees who were born in China, separated from their biological families, raised in the United States by White families, and given an Anglicized name at the time of their adoption. This study focused on participant experiences as they navigated being raised in the United States as transracial Chinese adoptees, their feelings related to their Chinese names, thoughts about China and birth family search, and experiences of ethnic and racial socialization within their adoptive families. Data were collected from in-depth, semi-structured interviews via Skype that integrated a constructivist–interpretivist and critical epistemological paradigm and coded using grounded-theory methods. Participants (N = 8) were transracial Chinese adoptees with ages ranging from 18 to 25 years (M = 21.5 years) who were between 6 and 17 months (M = 10.6 months) at the time of adoption. Results from the interviews revealed eight axial categories and three overarching selective categories related to their experience as transracial Chinese adoptees: (a) experiences of race and adoption, (b) factors influencing racial–ethnic socialization, and (c) recommendations for adoptive parents. Limitations of the study, future areas of research, and clinical and practice implications are discussed.
Keywords
International adoption of children from China officially began in 1992 due to the overwhelming number of abandoned children and children placed in foster care, combined with a lack of incentives for domestic adoption in China (Tsoi Hoshmand et al., 2006). China’s rapid ascent to a top sending country was in part a result of the One-Child Policy enacted in 1979 to regulate China’s population (Hesketh et al., 2005), as well as more stringent rules and conventions regulating the practice of intercountry adoption, leading many sending countries to close their doors in an effort to extinguish illegal and unethical adoption practices (Hague Conference on Private International Law, Adoption Section, n.d.; Tsoi Hoshmand et al., 2006). In addition, the social landscape surrounding intercountry adoption transformed since the 1970s and 1980s, as more single individuals and openly lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) couples have adopted children (Downing et al., 2009; Goldberg, 2009). Although the cost of adopting a child from Korea in the 1980s, for example, was approximately US$5,000, the cost ballooned to US$15,000 to US$20,000 for a child from mainland China in the early 2000s, suggesting that class continues to be a factor in the practice of international adoption (Tsoi Hoshmand et al., 2006).
With the historical and cultural preference for boys, the majority of children given up for adoption in China were girls (Hesketh et al., 2005). Through 1998, more than 98% of the approximately 100,000 abandoned children in China were girls (Johnson et al., 1998). Critical adoption scholars have suggested that this phenomenon is a form of gender oppression, in addition to representing a unique diaspora (i.e., involuntary relocation) of Chinese girls (Miller-Loessi & Kilic, 2001). Lee (2006) purported that another unspoken reason that international adoption from Korea and China has been so popular is due to racial stereotypes of the Asian model minority, assuming that Asian children are smart and well-behaved. This western stereotype has mystified the Asian experience, as others perceive Asians as not experiencing racism and discrimination, which in effect denies Asians of their trauma from racism/discrimination, and in the case of adoptees, the loss and trauma of adoption (Lee, 2006; Yoo & Lee, 2005). Furthermore, it has perpetuated the notion that individuals of Asian descent do not require clinical services and must be leading successful lives. On top of experiencing various forms of racism and discrimination (and for some Asian communities—colonialism) which are often minimized and dismissed throughout their lives, Asian adoptees will encounter adoption microaggressions over the course of their lives (see Baden, 2016; Reynolds et al., 2020; Sue et al., 2007). As seen throughout the 2020 global pandemic, Asians have experienced significant spikes in racism across the United States (G. S. Kim & Shah, 2020).
The U.S. Department of State (2018) reported approximately 80,000 Chinese adoptees were placed with families in the United States between 1992 and 2017, peaking in 2005 in which nearly 8,000 Chinese children were adopted by families in the United States. Despite adoptions from China to the United States having occurred at the highest rates of all sending countries over the past 20 years, transracial Chinese American adoptees continue to be a massively understudied community, particularly as many Chinese adoptees are now well into their adolescent and emerging adulthood years (Tsoi Hoshmand et al., 2006). Therefore, the present study attempted to gain a deeper understanding of the unique needs of Chinese adoptees adopted into White families in the United States through in-depth, qualitative interviews. In learning more about the Chinese American adoptee experience, the present study sought to add to the broad base of knowledge of racial/ethnic identity development, relationship to and use of names, and adoptive parents’ racial and ethnic socialization patterns.
Research on Chinese Adoption
Contemporary research on international and domestic adoption has focused on racial/ethnic identity development (Lee, 2003; Reynolds et al., 2016), racial and ethnic socialization patterns (Barn, 2013; Johnston et al., 2007; Langrehr, 2014; Montgomery & Powell, 2018; Morgan & Langrehr, 2019; Pinderhughes et al., 2015a; Scott et al., 2019), psychological adjustment of the family (Goldberg & Smith, 2013; Wilkinson, 1995), adoption microaggressions (Baden, 2016; Sue et al., 2007), and naming and birth name reclamation practices (Reynolds et al., 2019; Reynolds et al., 2020; Suter, 2012). However, the majority of the extant transracial international adoption research has focused on Korean adoptee or adoptive mother perspectives. This may be in part due to Korean adoption’s nearly 70-year history dating back to the 1950s, and Korean adoptees representing the largest adult intercountry adoptee ethnic group in the United States (E. J. Kim, 2010). Further research focused on other transracial adoptee groups is needed.
Research focused on transracial Chinese adoptees is scant. However, more recently adoption scholars have shifted their focus to the Chinese adoptee community. In their study on ethnic exploration and consciousness of difference for early adolescent Chinese American adoptees, Tessler and Gamache (2012) found that among 282 Chinese adopted girls, ethnic exploration provided Chinese adolescent girls with a positive and affirming way to normalize their consciousness of being visibly different from their peers and White family when race was a salient positive factor in their daily lives. Their findings also reflected that for transracial Chinese American female adoptees, ethnic exploration occurred earlier in life (i.e., early adolescence), compared with ethnic exploration in the transracial Korean American adoptee community (i.e., early adulthood; see Shiao & Tuan, 2008). One interpretation of this finding is participants were raised during a different generation, as Chinese adoptees grew up in the 1990s and 2000s when access to Asian representation and the internet/online communities was available. Tessler and Gamache (2012) also reported Chinese adoptee girls benefited from exploration of Chinese cultural heritage and exposure to other adoptees and children of Chinese Americans, suggesting the importance of organizing communities of adopted family groups for social support.
Suter (2012) studied adoptive parent renaming practices, specifically how transracial adoptee identities were affected by adoptive parent renaming practices in their study of 32 White adoptive parents of Chinese or Vietnamese adopted children. Adoptive parents chose to maintain the child’s birth ethnic name as the middle name, alter the name, create a new name, or exclude the birth name entirely. Suter found that the adoptive parent renaming process encouraged ethnic, family, and individual identity formation for the adoptees, depending on the name chosen. Naming and reclaiming birth name practices may have long-term impacts on the lives of transracial adoptees throughout the course of their lives (see Reynolds et al., 2020; Suter, 2012).
Identity Development
In his theory on Stages of Psychosocial Development (1963), Erikson described identity formation as representing a vital developmental task for all individuals in an effort to reach a positive sense of self and identity during adolescence; failure to do so leads to role confusion in life. J. Kim’s (1981) pioneering model of Asian American identity development outlined a stage model beginning with ethnic awareness, White identification, awakening to social political consciousness, redirection to Asian American consciousness, and incorporation. Grotevant’s (1997) model of identity development for intercountry transracial adoptees suggested that the goal for intercountry transracial adoptees is to navigate multiple identities while attempting to reach a coherent, integrated identity and sense of self, beginning with unexamined identity, limited identity, unsettled identity, and integrated identity. Reynolds et al. (2016) incorporated the transracial Korean adoptee experience with J. Kim’s (1981) and Grotevant’s (1997) models.
The process of identity development is largely impacted by family socialization, as identity formation is highly contextualized within a family environment, community, and larger society (Grotevant, 1987). Research has found that for transracial adoptees, overall psychological adjustment and positive self-esteem are strongly impacted by a positive sense of ethnic identity (Basow et al., 2008; Yoon, 2000). Reynolds et al. (2020) found that for intercountry transracial adoptees, birth and adoptive names may have an impact on one’s sense of identity and belonging to one’s culture and birth country. Although theoretical identity development models for transracial adoptees are useful in understanding the conceptual stages some individuals may be going through, models risk essentializing the experience, often failing to account for nuanced experiences while assuming that the goal is to reach the final stage of the identity model (Mandalaywala et al., 2018).
Racial–Ethnic Socialization and Preparation for Bias
Montgomery and Powell (2018) defined racial socialization as the process of fostering pride in one’s race and preparing children to deal with racial discrimination. The process of racial socialization has been shown to be positively associated with psychological well-being for transracial adoptees (Mohanty, 2013). Steinberg and Hall (2000) defined ethnic socialization as the process in which one develops an understanding of one’s culture of origin, learns how to function within majority society, and receives ways to approach racism and xenophobia. Mohanty and Newhill (2008) stated that it is also the process of children learning about their race, culture, and ethnicity by their parents and/or primary caregivers. Although often used interchangeably, these two patterns of socialization are nuanced experiences. Berbery and O’Brien (2011) described a combined racial–ethnic socialization as a process in which parents socialize their children about race and/or ethnicity, teach about racism and discrimination they may experience, strategize ways to deal with discrimination and oppression, and encourage pride in one’s race and ethnicity.
Research has shown that White transracial adoptive parents are often unaware or dismissive of the experiences of racism and discrimination that their transracially adopted children experience (Morgan & Langrehr, 2019), are more likely to emphasize a color-blind approach to parenting, and work to assimilate their transracial children into mainstream White culture and society while engaging in limited discussions about race (Barn, 2013; Langrehr, 2014). Research has suggested that for White families who do endeavor to racially and ethnically socialize their transracially adopted children, their efforts noticeably decrease over time as the child develops. In particular, adoptive parents of children from Asia are less likely to be socialized by their parents about race and ethnicity, compared with their Black/African American counterparts (Barn, 2013; Morgan & Langrehr, 2019; Silverman, 1993). Thus, transracial adoptees are often left fending for themselves while embodying a racial/ethnic incongruity between their race/ethnicity and adoptive family culture.
Lee (2003) described the transracial paradox, suggesting that transracial adoptees raised in White homes and families are recipients of some of the majority culture benefits and privileges; however, they remain members of marginalized groups as a racial/ethnic minority and carry adoptive and immigrant statuses. This tension often becomes more apparent as adoptees grow increasingly autonomous and independent of their parents, family, and community. Pinderhughes (2013) created an ethnic–racial socialization model that outlined the various factors influencing child outcomes, which included (a) the role of the parent (i.e., attitudes about cultural and ethnic differences, ethnic identity, cognitive and emotional processes, and the approach taken to facilitate ethnic–racial socialization), (b) ethnic–racial socialization process (i.e., the resources, activities, and discussions involved in cultural socialization and preparation for bias, as well as who is involved in this socialization process), and (c) child outcomes (i.e., ethnic–racial identity, adoptive identity, emotional adjustment, and self-esteem). Other factors included in this model were contextual considerations (i.e., family schedule, lifestyle, types of activities) and developmental considerations (i.e., what, when, and how to share/provide, and when to allow the child to choose/lead; Scott et al., 2019).
Preliminary findings have largely shown that parents who assumed a color-blind approach to parenting and failed to acknowledge differences did not facilitate racial–ethnic awareness in their children, whereas parents who acknowledged racial/ethnic/cultural differences in their transracially adopted children prioritized familial exposure to the adoptive child’s birth culture, recognized the family’s multicultural background, and engaged in and practiced ethnic–racial socializing (Berbery & O’Brien, 2011; O. M. Kim et al., 2013; Pinderhughes et al., 2015b). Therefore, adoptive parents prepared their adoptive children for bias when they acknowledged racial and ethnic differences in lived experiences (compared with color-blind approaches), worked to understand the world through their child’s perspective, and recognized the importance of equipping children to enter a world in which they will be forced to endure racism and stigma as persons of color, immigrants, and racial–ethnic minorities (Berbery & O’Brien, 2011; Crolley-Simic & Vonk, 2011; Lee et al., 2006).
Baden et al.’s (2012) Reculturation Framework
Baden et al. (2012) coined the term reculturation to describe the process that transracial adoptees may experience in their journey from identifying with their adoptive parents’ White culture, to eventually exploring, discovering/rediscovering, and reclaiming their culture of origin. Although terms such as enculturation and acculturation exist as processes that many immigrants experience when adjusting to life in a new country, Baden et al. (2012) suggested these terms fall short of the unique lived experiences that adoption engenders for many transracial adoptees.
The process of reculturation is developmental in nature. Although significant variation exists in when and how the process of reculturation unfolds, Baden et al. (2012) reported that reculturation most often occurs during adolescence or early/emerging adulthood. In particular, as transracial adoptees internalize and grow into their White adoptive family culture, they may begin to reflect and experience levels of dissonance between their dominant majority adoptive family cultural experiences and their personal lived experiences as a racial minority (McGinnis et al., 2009). Throughout this process, transracial adoptees may begin to discuss and explore more about their country and culture of origin, which often occurs at key developmental transitions in life (e.g., attending college; moving out of one’s family home and/or community; Baden et al., 2012). This process may include active or passive reculturative behaviors which increase comfort with activities, values, and beliefs in the culture of origin (e.g., returning to birth country, attending cultural events, learning about food and history of birth country, attending and/or working at culture camps, enrolling in language classes; Baden & Steward, 2000; Baden et al., 2012), facilitate exploration of identity and contact with the racial/ethnic community (e.g., living in diverse neighborhoods, seeking out mentors from shared racial/ethnic backgrounds, becoming friends with other racial/ethnic minority members), and develop one’s identity as an adoptee (e.g., reading books and watching films on the history of adoption, attending adoptee events and conferences, joining adoptee groups, performing the birth family search; Baden et al., 2012).
Baden et al. (2012) described a six-stage model of reculturation for international adoptees: (a) enculturation begins (i.e., taking in one’s own birth culture via parents/caregivers; Chung et al., 2008); (b) relinquishment and temporary care (i.e., birth parents may relinquish, abandon, or be forced/coerced to terminate parental rights; Baden & Wiley, 2007); (c) adoption: enculturation stops, assimilation begins (i.e., when placed with international adoptive parents, process of enculturation from birth parents stops and process of assimilation to adoptive parents culture begins); (d) immigration (i.e., experiences as an immigrant and foreign born individual will impact lived experience, depending on country of birth and racial climate/history of colonization in adopted country); (e) assimilation continues (i.e., adopted children assimilate and absorb cultural practices of adoptive family; Lancaster & Nelson, 2009); (f) reculturation process and three approaches to reculturation (i.e., education, experience, immersion). The possible outcomes of this reculturation model are: (a) adoptee culture (identify primarily as an adoptee over either birth or adoptive family culture); (b) reclaimed culture (fully immersed in birth culture); (c) bicultural (adoptive family White culture and hyphenated-American ethnic group); (d) assimilated culture (i.e., White American culture); and (e) combined culture (combination of cultures; Baden et al., 2012). As with all developmental models, there are limitations and essentializing elements (Mandalaywala et al., 2018); however, developmental models may still provide valuable insight into the possible directions and stages individuals move through. Identity development, racial/ethnic socialization and preparation for bias, and reculturation provide the theoretical basis for the study.
Method
Participants
Data were obtained from eight transracial Chinese American adoptees with ages ranging from 18 to 25 years (M = 21.50 years, SD = 2.73) who were between 6 and 17 months (M = 10.63 months, SD = 4.00) at the time of adoption. One participant identified as Chinese-Filipina, as she discovered she was ethnically Chinese and Filipina through performing a DNA test. Seven participants identified as female and one participant identified as gender nonconforming (GNC). Seven participants identified as heterosexual and one participant identified as bisexual. All eight participants were adopted into White families living in the United States. Six participants were raised in New York, one was raised in Pennsylvania, and one was raised in New Jersey. Four participants had no siblings and four participants had one sibling who was also adopted from China. Five participants had returned to China at the time of the study. One participant had performed the birth family search but was not reunited with their birth family. One participant was reunited with their birth family but had not performed the birth family search. Two participants had reclaimed their birth name, although one of these participants reclaimed her birth name between the ages of 18 and 21 years and then reverted to her adoptive name. Five participants were single and three were in committed relationships at the time of the interviews. All eight participants had at least a high school education. Five participants had completed their bachelor’s degree, one participant had completed their master’s degree, and two participants were currently graduate students. Two participants identified as Christian, one participant identified as Jewish, two participants identified as atheist, one participant identified as agnostic, and two participants stated they were not religious. See Table 1 for participant demographics. Pseudonyms were used in place of participant names to protect the privacy and confidentiality of participants and their families.
Participant Demographics and Background Information (N = 8).
The original research proposal planned to interview 10 to 15 participants. After posting the recruitment flyer for the study, there was an initial wave of interest from individuals who met inclusion criteria and were interested in participating in the study based on recruitment through Facebook as well as snowball sampling (Patton, 1990). Upon completion of each interview, interviews were transcribed and coded by the larger research team. Throughout this process, it was determined by the team that while there had only been eight participants, saturation of themes had been reached as no new open categories (Fassinger, 2005) had been uncovered after the eight participant interviews. In addition, no other individuals reached out expressing interest in participating. Thus, the team decided that no further participants would be interviewed for the study.
Researchers
The first author entered this study with more biases and previous adoption research experience. His personal lived experience as a transracial intercountry Korean American adoptee who was raised in a western context in the United States, had returned to Korea multiple times, and reclaimed his Korean name, provided him with insight into the transracial adoption experience, as well as potential biases and blind spots. In addition, the fourth, fifth, and sixth authors spent the previous academic year reviewing and coding qualitative interviews focused on Korean American and Korean European transracial adoptees who had reclaimed their Korean names (Reynolds et al., 2019), and thus had some of their own viewpoints and perspectives despite not being adoptees themselves. The second and third authors had no prior research or personal experience with adoption.
The goal of having a six-person research team was to help offset any of the first author’s biases and provide renewed perspective from unique angles. The diverse team provided depth to the analytic process. The team consisted of two women of color (South Asian—Indian and Latinx—Peruvian), two queer White women, one Black man originally from the Caribbean, and one Korean adoptee, which allowed for deeper illumination of themes and meaning units through consensus building in the analytic process (Levitt et al., 2018). Although the team acknowledged the power dynamic that existed, as the first author was the research advisor/mentor as well as course instructor for some of the other research team members, the group worked together to minimize the power dynamic. Member perspectives were equally valued. When discussing an interview, the first author stepped back during coding meetings and relied more heavily on the perspectives of the research team to help discover the meaning and findings from the participant interviews in search of consensus.
Sources of Data
Demographic form
Participants completed a brief online demographic form through Qualtrics. The form served to gather demographic information about interested individual’s backgrounds as well as to ensure individuals met inclusion criteria. This information included current age, age at time of adoption, gender identity, sexual orientation, educational history, religious background, relationship status, marriage/divorce status, ethnic identity, return trips to China, and birth family reunification (if applicable).
Interview protocol
The in-depth interview focused on the following question: “Tell me about your experience as a transracial Chinese American adoptee raised in the United States.” Probes also explored experiences with birth name, thoughts about birth family, and returning to China. Given the constructivist–interpretivist and critical epistemologies, the interviewer and participant engaged dialogically which helped deepen the discovery process (Levitt, 2015; Ponterotto, 2005).
Procedure
Data collection
The present study was approved by the principal investigator’s institutional review board (IRB). Transracial Chinese adoptees were recruited online through Facebook using the principal investigator’s personal adoptee network as well as snowballing sampling procedure (Patton, 1990). In addition, the study was posted on two adoptee groups on Facebook. The inclusion criteria for this study required that participants were Chinese-born adoptees adopted by the age of 10, were given an Anglicized name at the time of adoption, were at least 18 years of age, graduated high school or had their GED, and could read and speak English to respond to the online demographic form and participate in the interview.
Recruitment of participants lasted approximately one academic semester. Nine interested individuals filled out the online demographic form through Qualtrics, and eight individuals met inclusion criteria to participate in the study. The principal investigator contacted each of the interested and eligible individuals by email to thank them for their interest in the study, sent them the informed consent document, and answered questions about the study. Interested individuals signed the informed consent forms which were returned to the principal investigator and interviews were scheduled. All interviews were conducted and transcribed by the principal investigator. At any point during the recruitment, interview, or postinterview stages, participants were able to decline or withdraw their participation in the study, as outlined in the informed consent document as well as discussed with the principal investigator before the interview. Following the interview, participants received US$20 compensation. Participant interviews and transcripts were deidentified to protect the identities of participants.
Data analysis
Data were analyzed using grounded-theory methodology (Fassinger, 2005). Identity development, racial–ethnic socialization, and Baden’s reculturation framework (2012) provided the theoretical basis for the analysis. Grounded-theory methodology (Charmaz, 2006; Fassinger, 2005; Strauss & Corbin, 1998) was chosen because of its focus on the meaning derived from social interactions, as well as its goal to derive theory that is grounded in the data. All six members of the research team reviewed individual interview transcripts and met weekly to discuss the emerging themes from the interviews. Grounded theory utilizes a three-step coding process (i.e., open, axial, and selective coding; Fassinger, 2005). The research team initially formed open categories of information based on meaning units through participant quotes (i.e., open coding; Fassinger, 2005; Richie et al., 1997). Open categories may be as small as a word, or as large as a page, but most frequently are a short paragraph in length (Fassinger, 2005).
After reviewing each of the eight interviews individually, the open categories were drawn up on a large poster paper to provide the team with visual displays of the codes. During the second phase, the team compared and contrasted the open categories from each of the eight interviews. Through comparison, discussion, and consensus building, the team organized, combined, modified, and identified commonalities among the open codes to form axial categories (i.e., axial coding; Fassinger, 2005; Strauss & Corbin, 1998). In the third and final coding phase, the team connected the axial categories into comprehensive selective categories (i.e., selective coding; Fassinger, 2005; Strauss & Corbin, 1998). The team met weekly and spent time reviewing, coding, and analyzing the data for 6 months. This constant comparison process was bidirectional—both sequential and recursive (Fassinger, 2005).
The team followed Morrow’s (2005) and Lincoln and Guba’s (1995) trustworthiness guidelines, by working toward an inductive, idiographic/emic, and theory-building process aimed at learning about and understanding participant experiences rather than explaining. The researchers worked to elucidate participant experiences by using quotes that illuminated participant thoughts and emotions, thus helping the reader truly feel what the participants have experienced (i.e., thick description; Ponterotto, 2006).
Results
Following three rounds of coding and analysis, the research team arrived at the following three selective categories and eight axial categories. See Table 2 for a complete list.
Selective and Axial Categories.
Experiences of Race and Adoption
For the eight individuals who participated in this study, it was clear following their in-depth interviews that their experiences related to race and adoption significantly impacted their identity, and navigating the world as transracial adoptees with adoptive family names perpetuated their experiences of adoptive and racial microaggressions. The following axial categories illuminate the four factors that participants reported as influencing their identity.
Chinese names and racial and ethnic identity
Seven participants indicated that their Chinese name was a tangible reminder of their Chinese identity, regardless of the strength of connection to their Chinese name. Jessica Thomas, a 23-year-old female adoptee raised in New Jersey, described her connection to her Chinese name: I think having my Chinese name, the full name, reminds me that I am sort of fusing two identities together. One that I was born with, or that I have a cultural heritage of, and one that my parents gave to me.
Sara Fielding, a 19-year-old GNC adoptee raised in Pennsylvania, shared their connection to their Chinese name: I was never really a fan of it [American name]. I always would come up with different names or things I would go by instead. And then I became more interested in my Chinese names. So I ended up going through my papers and trying to find out where my characters were and then my name. And I started going by that just because it was the one name that I knew I wouldn’t always be changing because I have a history with it, it’s already there, to use it as an alternative to Sara. So then when I was 16, I started going by it at school. I was just slowly getting everybody to use it. My parents were not happy, wow. They hated that, especially since they knew I was considering changing it legally, which I still am probably going to do.
Jessica and Sara discussed the importance of their Chinese names and the connection their names have to their identity and history with China, despite Sara facing adversity and lack of parental support while reclaiming this name. Both Jessica and Sara spent significant time and psychological energy thinking about the meaning and power of their names, the familial connections of their names, and how their Chinese name connects them to their heritage and culture. Some participants indicated they were considering a name change or name reclamation in the future, but were still working through the decision.
Adoption disclosure to avoid assumptions
Seven participants reported that they felt it necessary to disclose their adoption status with others, specifically after introducing oneself. Although there were mixed feelings related to this (i.e., exhaustion and frustration for having to share; not feeling affected by having to share), participants felt that it was important to clarify for others or that they were obligated to disclose their adoptee status to avoid assumptions. Jill Evans, an 18-year-old female adoptee raised in New York, shared her sentiments on the matter: I feel like no matter what, when I say my name, adoption has to come up . . . I never know if me saying I’m adopted is them wanting to know or me kind of just wanting to get it over with so that they understand where I am coming from.
Leah Fisher, a 25-year-old female adoptee, described self-disclosing her adoptee status: I guess I end up having to explain the whole adoption thing and I think I kind of resent having to do that. You know, ‘cause it’s like how people ask nosy questions. I guess it’s because they don’t understand, they’ve never met someone who is adopted, Asian, and Jewish. I guess I just feel kind of uncomfortable having to share something personal but I do it anyways I guess so that they can understand me. Otherwise, they’ll just kind of be confused. But sometimes I’ll be a little more stand-offish than other times and I’ll either lie or just won’t give any information.
Jill and Leah described their process of disclosing their adoption status to prevent further confusion with others concerning their name so that others understood they were not raised culturally Chinese in an Asian family. Leah also spoke to her unique intersectional identity (adoptee, Asian, and Jewish) and that while she resents having to share her adoptee status, she at times does so to prevent further confusion regarding her connection to China and Chinese culture. She also described times when she lies or gives no information, suggesting that she and other transracial adoptees with Anglicized names go through some sort of decision-making process on whether to share and to what extent.
Experience of racial and adoption microaggressions
The eight participants in this study recalled many painful experiences of racial and adoption microaggressions (Baden et al., 2012; Sue et al., 2007) over the course of their lives. Kristen Marsal, a 23-year-old female adoptee raised in New York, reported experiencing an adoption-based racial microaggression: “They will say, ‘Oh, but you are not really Asian because you were raised by White parents.’” Jill Evans discussed a similar experience she frequently encountered: Everyone assumes that I have Asian parents because I am so driven and dedicated to my work. And I tell them that I am adopted, and they are like, ‘Oh my God, you are so lucky you don’t have Asian parents.’ I don’t really know how to respond.
For Kristen, this common experience completely denied her lived experience as an Asian person and also sent a denigrating message about transracial adoption. This is a common phrase that transracial adoptees are forced to weather, suggesting that they are not fully Asian or that somehow their experiences in the world are less Asian than an Asian person raised by Asian parents because they were raised by White parents through adoption. It is othering and perhaps even humiliating to the adopted individual. Jill’s statement implies several messages: there is an assumption that Asian people are only driven because of the pressure they receive from Asian parents; second, the perpetrator may feel their comment is a compliment in that you are “so lucky you don’t have Asian parents”; however, most transracial adoptees spend a lot of time thinking about birth parents whom they will never meet. Saying you are “lucky you don’t have Asian parents” is dismissive and denies the pain, grief, and loss experienced by adopted individuals who may never have the opportunity to meet their Asian parents (Baden et al., 2012).
Aubrey Mead described experiencing racial microaggressions (Sue et al., 2007) and the stereotypes associated with being Asian: I mean I had a few comments that were outright, but for most of my life, it was the small ones. ‘Oh of course you are playing the violin and piano because you’re Asian. Of course you are good at math . . .’ It was those small things, I think. I never really had too many issues, especially as I got older, the slightly more obvious, like the eyes and what not. Those issues went down, and it was more those small assumptions that people make about Asian people.
Jackie Moore, an 18-year-old female adoptee raised in New York and New Jersey, shared her experience of an adoptee name microaggression as an adoptee with an Anglicized name: So when I walk into a room, a lot of people expect, I guess a White person or someone who is not Chinese. I’ve had a lot of experiences where they call my name for like attendance, and they are not looking at me. I have to get their attention like, “no, no, no I am Jackie Moore. This is me.” I had an experience where I toured a college, I walked into the admissions office and was like, ‘Hi I’m here for my tour.’ And this lady jumped on me, she was like, ‘You’re half an hour late, do you know what you’ve done? You’ve really held up everything. This is like a disgrace, you can’t be this late if you are going to come to this college.’ She handed me the packet, she’s like ‘I guess we’ll have to figure something out.’ And the name on the packet was like a very Chinese name. I was like, ‘No actually I’m Jackie Moore, I’m 10 minutes early for my tour. She was like, ‘Oh my god, I’m so sorry. Here is your packet.’ I feel like that was a turning point where I was like, oh my god, people really don’t expect me when they see my name, they expect someone else.
Jackie’s experiences illuminated how challenging it can be to navigate the world as a transracial Chinese adoptee with an Anglicized name living in the United States (adoption name microaggression; Reynolds et al., 2020). She described her college tour as a turning point in her awareness and consciousness related to transracial adoptee names and others’ perceptions and assumptions of her based on identity markers such as her name and her race/ethnicity. This experience completely changed her perspective on how others perceived her, which was around the time of a key developmental transition (Baden et al., 2012).
Hopelessness around birth family search
Five participants recounted their hopelessness surrounding the birth family search and the possibility of reunification one day. Aubrey Mead communicated her feelings on the issue: “There are so many people in China. There are just so many unknowns that doing a birth family search, it’s possible but the likeliness of it turning up anything is very rare.” Given that there are more than 1.3 billion people in mainland China, and that the overwhelming majority of Chinese adoptees have little to no information in their adoption papers beyond knowing that they were given up as a direct result of the One-Child Policy, there was a felt sense of hopelessness regarding searching and reunifying. Participants also commented and reflected on the fact that it was likely they have siblings, given the One-Child Policy was the primary reason they were given up for adoption.
Factors Influencing Racial–Ethnic Socialization
Each of the eight Chinese adoptee participants in this study reported experiencing various factors that strongly influenced their racial and ethnic socialization as they developed. The following four axial categories illuminate the various factors impacting racial and ethnic socialization for the participants.
Unprepared by adoptive parents for racial bias
Seven participants expressed that they were racially unprepared to face the world by their adoptive parents and often did not share their experiences of racism with their parents, or when they did it was met with confusion and at times defensiveness. Aubrey Mead shared her sense of racial preparation by her parents: So my preparation to face the world as a person of color definitely didn’t come from them. Race has always been one of those things that is like the elephant in the room, we don’t talk about. I still don’t feel comfortable talking to them about it because I know, in high school my father and I would have conversations and friendly debates of sorts, and sometimes it would go into those more personal issues for me . . . if I start talking about it, they are just gonna go on the defensive, so I am just going to avoid talking about it. Sometimes they try to get me to talk about it, and I’m just like no, no. It’s an unspoken rule we don’t talk about that in this family.
Leah Fisher discussed her parents’ attempts to understand and support her experiences of racism: Well it made me realize that the things that my parents would or wouldn’t say, they would kind of minimize situations or they didn’t really know how to talk about race growing up. Though whenever I experienced racist bullying as a kid, they were very supportive and empathized with me. But I guess they’re kind of limited in how much they can really empathize or kind of understand what I’ve been through. So I thought of how it’s different for families, for Asian families, for Asian families where it’s like two Asian parents and the kids are also Asian and they can relate to each other better. . .But more recently when I was taking these classes I was explaining to them [adoptive parents], or I was starting to talk about these topics of being racially bullied, I was bringing them up and we were just talking about them. I think maybe they took it the wrong way but I was trying to explain to them that they can never really know what it’s like to be racially bullied because they are White. And that’s not their fault or anything, that’s just kind of a fact. I think they were maybe trying to empathize by saying they were also bullied in school but for different things, like for having buck teeth or long hair, or a big nose, or acne and stuff. But I was trying to explain, but it’s not the same thing. It’s not. My mom would say, “Well I was always afraid to tell kids that I was Jewish.” Which is more similar, like that makes more sense, but it’s still the racial piece that’s different that they don’t know.
Jackie Moore described experiencing racism in the presence of her father and his response: I was getting my passport photo taken to get it renewed at our local library and I was with my dad. And the lady who did it was White. And she was like, ‘Don’t smile too big, we have to see your eyes.’ I was like whatever and didn’t say anything. And then as we were leaving I told my dad and he was like, ‘No, that didn’t happen.’ I think he was more like not sure how to react than trying to be dismissive. But that was really off-putting and upsetting.
These three participants chronicled a wide range of familial experiences related to racial preparation and avoidance of racial conversations in the home and community. In some cases, the adoptive parents were in denial about the reality and lived experience of their adopted child’s racialized experience in the United States, whereas other parents tried their best to understand the racism and discrimination their child experienced by relating it to their own past painful experiences. This, however, was hot helpful as it failed to acknowledge the power differential that exists between the perpetrator and victim in a racist exchange. Despite the variance, adoptees felt they were unprepared and had to learn how to navigate the world as a Chinese and Asian person outside of their families.
Chinese adoptee community support
All participants recounted the gravity of the Chinese American adoptee community as they were growing up and through their participation in Chinese adoptive family groups (e.g., Families with Children from China [FCC]). In addition, participants described the salience of their connections with other Chinese adoptees into emerging adulthood. Many participants stated some of their closest friends are other Chinese adoptees. Kristen Marsal shared how the Chinese adoptee community has been present throughout her life: I was always part of the group . . . I do the annual, or twice a year Chinese cousin meet-ups. That’s my adoption group, where all our parents were from the same adoption agency, they went together at the same time to go adopt all of us. Three of us were in the same crib together. Four or five of us were from the same orphanage, but we’re all from the same province . . . So we see each other for Christmas and Chinese New Year. Christmas always . . . We’ve never missed a reunion. As a group, no one has missed a reunion. It has always been a consistent reunion, two times a year. And me being close with other adoptees, I have quite a few because when I was little I was forced to take Chinese lessons, which my parents wanted me to have some part of Chinese culture attached to myself. And all those girls in those classes were Chinese as well. So I made good friends with them . . . And Kim [Chinese adoptee friend] is my best friend and we have known each other since we were babies.
It was clear Kristen’s relationships with other adoptees provided her with a supportive community in her life, one in which she felt an intimate bond and connection. Participants indicated that their connections with other adoptees were unique from other friendships due to their shared race and ethnicity, nontraditional family constellation, and the normalizing experience of being an adopted person of color within a White family. In addition, for some of the participants, they stated that there were deep connections between and among the various families within their Chinese adoptee communities in which they had been part of since they were adopted. Although other adoptee groups may have similar types of groups in place, the Chinese adoptive family community in the northeastern United States is developed and organized, such as Families with Children from China Greater New York City area (Families with Children from China, n.d.)
Living in diverse communities promotes reculturative activities and adoptee socialization
Six participants recounted the importance of growing up in the inner-city and within diverse communities, which lent itself opportunities for reculturative activities and adoptee socialization. In particular, these participants grew up in close proximity to Chinese communities (i.e., in or near Chinatowns). Although living in large diverse cities did not always ensure participants connected to their Chinese heritage, they appreciated the cultural opportunities and racial/ethnic representation surrounding them. Jackie Moore expressed the benefits and challenges of growing up in a diverse neighborhood: Yeah, well my mom was very conscious about the fact that she was raising an Asian kid, as much as you can be at the time at least in the mid 90s. So what they would do in Brooklyn, they would go with some other Chinese adoptive families, either they just adopted their kids or they were about to. And they would go and listen to the panels of Korean adoptees from like AKA [Also-Known-As] when they were younger. So they got their information from them specifically about how they lacked, that they felt that they lacked a connection to their Korean culture, hence I think the overdoing of the Chinese culture in a lot of ways, for us at least.
Whitney Kelly also discussed her experience growing up in the city: So I grew up in New York City, which I think is one of the better places to grow up as an adoptee because New York has always been known to be full of crazy, different, eccentric people. So it was never an issue necessarily, with me, as I know with other people where they are in a predominantly White town and you always get those stares. That never really happened with me. I just walked alongside my mom and dad it’d be pretty much Ok. . .But yeah, it’s a great place to learn different cultures, different people, just meeting up with other adoptees and knowing that I saw a lot of other Asians around that looked like me also helped. With a stronger international presence, you got to celebrate more of their cultures and holidays and festivals. You got to know the superstitions, traditions, you know what you do during New Years, what you do during the Lunar Festival. I think all that really made me feel more included in the community. But I definitely still thought that there was a line between Americans interested in Asian society and then Asians who lived in that society.
According to Jackie and Whitney, growing up and living in diverse communities as transracial Chinese American adoptees was important in stimulating their growth and development. Both participants were able to attend and experience Chinese cultural events, which helped promote racial and ethnic development earlier than if they had been raised in more rural or suburban areas in which they would have been one of only a few Asians and people of color. This also prevented the stares and othering experiences that folks of Asian descent may experience in less diverse parts of the country where they are regarded as perpetual foreigners and aliens in their own land (Sue et al., 2007). Furthermore, they were not alone in their adoptive family experiences in larger more diverse cities. Several participants spoke of the importance of the exposure to other adoptee groups, such as the Korean adoptee group Also-Known-As in New York City. This may not have been possible in more rural areas.
Learning about Chinese culture from White parents felt inauthentic
Three participants discussed the challenges and mixed emotions of learning about Chinese culture from or with their White parents. This, in some ways, placed adoptees in a bind; on one hand, they may want to learn about Chinese culture, but on the contrary, learning about Chinese culture may have felt awkward, uneasy, or less authentic from White parents or family. Jackie Moore described her experience with her parents: So they tried to do their best in incorporating me into that community, whether they were adoptees or other Chinese people. Like going to a dumpling shop like a street away or visiting this one other local small business to buy Chinese New Year candy every year, we did that all the time. Or like going to watch the parade for those things or whatever. So they were all really fun, but I think again, what I am really trying to say I guess is they did the best they could given what they had learned. When I was getting older and trying to process it a bit more after experiencing more Asian American culture I guess, my frustration was the way that I was introduced to Chinese culture, I think stemmed more from, it was almost as if, which it was I guess, what they taught me was almost inauthentic because it was coming from White people.
Jackie’s quote exemplified the complexities of being exposed to one’s heritage and culture through one’s White adoptive parents. Being in Asian spaces, attending Chinese cultural events, and learning about Chinese culture from White people somehow felt less authentic for Jackie. For Jackie and other participants, being taught about Chinese culture through eating at a dumpling shop and attending Chinese cultural events with White adoptive parents who do not possess the culture (i.e., food, celebrations, etc.) felt surface-level and did not feel the same as learning about and participating in these events with other Asians. The fact that adoptive parents attempted to teach Chinese culture without teaching about race/ethnicity (e.g., what it means to be Asian), which would have been more useful though not necessarily possible, presented a tension for participants: attending events and activities as an outsider or observer, versus actively participating in events and activities as an insider.
Jackie’s statement supports the notion that Chinese, Asian, and other transracial adoptees would benefit from mentors and teachers with shared racial and ethnic backgrounds who can help the adoptee take in culture through experiential activities and opportunities, which can be helpful for racial and ethnic identity development (McGinnis et al., 2009). It is also worth exploring how much exposure and integration of Chinese culture is enough before the child may feel it is being overdone with their White families, which Jackie Moore had previously alluded to in her interview. Some participants mentioned that this could lead to rejection of the heritage and culture, which has also been seen across other transracially adopted groups (McGinnis et al., 2009). Further understanding of the impacts of racial identity development and its interaction with adoptee identity development would be important to explore, as this relationship could also lead to adoptee opposition to their White parents’ attempts to introduce Chinese culture.
Recommendations for Adoptive Parents and Therapists
All eight participants shared their thoughts and feelings regarding how things could be improved for intercountry transracial adoptees. Based on the interviews, participants provided some concrete recommendations for parents and therapists centered on their personal lived experiences. Leah Fisher described her recommendations for how parents could help support transracial adoptees better: . . . for children to have role models that look like them, which is not something that I really thought about before. And look like them, meaning the same race as them . . . I guess if I was exposed or if I had toys or dolls that were Asian and how those little things do have an impact on racial identity. So I guess maybe like having more available role models that were Asian, I think, would have helped . . . it would be good for them [adoptees] to know the different ways of handling it [racism], or different ways of reacting . . . How do you defend yourself or fight back, or what you can say? Maybe like a support group or something . . . it seemed maybe worse or it made less sense why I would get racially bullied considering I don’t even feel that Asian. Or why I would get bullied if I have White parents and I actually feel White inside, you know?
White adoptive parents may try their best to be the person that their child seeks out for support following an experience of racial discrimination; however, parents may not be prepared to provide the support that their child needs. Participants suggested that transracial Chinese adoptees be exposed to Asian role models who look like them and that adoptees have access to Asian support groups and adoptee groups to help normalize their racialized and adoptive experiences. The participants suggested that adoptive parents need to truly listen to their children and provide adoptees with all the possible opportunities (i.e., language lessons, Chinese cultural camps, Chinese workshops and events, return trips to China, mentoring) but that they should not force the children to engage in these activities and listen to the child if the child is rejecting or does not wish to participate in these cultural activities. Adoptees suggested that parents allow the child to make their own decision of whether to participate and to what degree rather than overwhelming the child with pressure to participate. Finally, participants suggested that therapists should listen more and not immediately jump to the conclusion that every issue discussed in session is related to adoption. Participants also mentioned that school teachers should receive more training on the topic of transracial adoption so they are more considerate.
Discussion
The findings from this study provide adoptees, parents, and clinicians with information regarding the complexities of transracial adoption. Extant research has explored various factors related to the transracial Korean American community, yet transracial Chinese American experiences have largely been unexplored. Preliminary findings suggest that Chinese American adoptees share some similarities with Korean American adoptees raised in the United States, yet given the unique history and factors surrounding intercountry adoption from China, this community requires special consideration. In particular, the One-Child Policy resulted in large-scale patterns of abandonment of Chinese girls with little to no birth family information. As a result, the majority of participants felt a sense of Hopelessness Around Birth Family Search and the possibility of reunification. Given the vastness of China and the nearly complete lack of birth family information, Chinese adoptees in the present study were less focused on performing the birth family search than in previous studies with the Korean adoptee community (see Reynolds et al., 2016, 2020), yet remained interested in visiting China and learning about Chinese and Asian American culture. In addition, participants in this sample were interested in their Chinese Names and Racial and Ethnic Identity, but most participants had not reclaimed their Chinese birth name, although some were considering a change in the future. Participants described the importance of Adoption Disclosure to Avoid Assumptions. Participants disclosed their adoption status as a preventive measure to avoid confusion and ensure others did not make assumptions such as the adoptee was literate in Chinese culture, spoke the language, or was raised in an ethnically Chinese family.
Participants reported that Living in Diverse Communities (Promoted Reculturative Activities and Adoptee Socialization) was helpful to their development and growth as persons of color and Chinese American adoptees. Adoptee participants spoke of reculturative activities such as opportunities to learn about Chinese culture through attending Chinese cultural events in diverse cities, learning about Chinese culture and language through cultural camps, and in many cases returning to China. Adoptee socialization, or adoptee exposure to other transracial adoptees and/or adoptive groups, such as other intercountry Chinese adoptees through FCC or the Korean adoptee group Also-Known-As in New York City, was specifically noted as influential and salient to the growth and development of the participants. These opportunities allowed for scaffolding to occur from older transracial adoptee cohorts, specifically learning about transracial Asian adoptee spaces, the unique needs of the community, and how to navigate identity and the world as an adoptee. In addition, it facilitated adoptee socialization practices, or the process of learning about what it means to be a transracial adoptee raised in a White family and the idiosyncrasies that come along with this unique space as an Asian, racial minority, and immigrant, such as navigating identity, relationships and attachment, and birth family/culture. In many ways, adoptee socialization through connection to other adoptees gives permission to voice the unique challenges experienced as a transracial adoptee and take a critical stance on intercountry transracial adoption through learning more about the history of transracial adoption within the geopolitical structures that led to intercountry transracial adoption.
Furthermore, participants discussed the importance of having Chinese Adoptee Community Support as being particularly salient in their ability to practice self-care and find sources of support. The participants also agreed that while their parents did their best to expose the adoptees to Chinese culture, there was a sense from some participants that Learning about Chinese Culture from White parents Felt Inauthentic. In addition, participants described the various forms of racism and discrimination they experienced growing up, and reported that they were Unprepared by Adoptive Parents for Racial Bias and to face the world as individuals of Chinese descent. They did not feel their parents understood their experience as racial minorities, and for many race was not a topic of conversation within the home. This finding is consistent with previous findings about racial socialization practices in families. Brown et al. (2007) found in their study (N = 18,852) that nearly three quarters of parents never (23.21%), almost never (21.47%), or several times a year (27.58%) practiced racial/ethnic socialization with their children across a diverse sample. However, the authors did find that families of parents of color were 1.9 to 4.7 times more likely to discuss ethnic/racial heritage than White families. In their systematic review of 13 studies related to racial–ethnic socialization of transracial adoptive families, they found that increased racial–ethnic socialization practices were associated with healthier adoptee outcomes. Langrehr (2014) found that cross-racial friendships moderated the effects of color-blind attitudes for transracial adoptive parents.
Despite these research findings, transracial adoptive parents continue to avoid engaging in racial dialogues and/or maintain color-blind attitudes and views toward socialization, as seen through the findings in this study and through previous studies (Langrehr, 2014; Langrehr et al., 2019; Morgan & Langrehr, 2019). This may in part be due to feelings of guilt and shame that parents cannot relate to the painful experiences of their children of color (Langrehr, 2014). Still, it remains essential to equip and prepare transracial adoptees for the racial discrimination they will experience, in particular as research has shown experiences of racial discrimination is associated with behavioral and psychological dysfunction in international adoptees (Cederblad et al., 1999; Langrehr, 2014; Lee & The Minnesota International Adoption Project Team, 2010). Chang et al. (2017) stated that when adoptive parents avoid or are ambivalent about discussing race, racism, and White privilege, adopted children are more likely to experience a decrease in their comfort level which may stilt their own healthy exploration of race and racial dynamics in the home for fear of burdening their parents. These findings have important implications for transracial adoptive families.
Limitations and Areas for Future Research
There are several limitations from this study. The findings from this study should not be generalized to other transracial Chinese American adoptees, particularly given the small sample size (N = 8) as well as the limited geographic location, education level, and limited diversity of participants with regard to gender identity and sexual orientation. Another limitation is that recruitment was limited to online recruitment through online posts on the principal investigator’s Facebook page as well as on two Chinese adoption groups on Facebook. Additional recruitment efforts may have yielded a more diverse range of experiences and perspectives.
Given the paucity of research focused on the transracial Chinese American adoptee community, future research may approach this community exploring a variety of topics and methodologies with a wider geographic range of Chinese American adoptees, take a deeper intersectional approach, and incorporate transracial Chinese adoptees placed with families in other countries. Future research may study topics related to identity, belonging, birth family search and reunification, adoption-focused therapy, return trips to China and reculturation (Baden et al., 2012), racial and ethnic socialization, and transracial adoptive parenting practices.
Clinical and Practice Implications and Recommendations
Findings from this study suggest that the clinical implications for transracial adoption continue to evolve. In particular, finding a therapist from a shared racial background could be an opportunity for the adoptee to focus on identity development, explore feelings about birth and adoptive names, discuss experiences of racism and discrimination, and process racial/ethnic socialization. Each of these topics may help form a more integrated, coherent sense of self and identity (Basow et al., 2008; Erikson, 1963; Grotevant, 1987; Yoon, 2000). As the participants shared during the Recommendations theme from participant interviews, therapists should not assume that every issue that is brought up in therapy is somehow related to their adoption.
Parents and family members of adoptees would also benefit from learning about insidious forms of racism and othering, such as racial, adoption, and adoptee name microaggressions (Baden, 2016; Morgan & Langrehr, 2019; Reynolds et al., 2020; Sue et al., 2007). Many well-intentioned White parents may not know how they can be helpful or ways in which they may intervene to stop or prevent microaggressions from occurring. Sue et al. (2019) outlined various brief and efficient strategies to combatting and disarming racial microaggressions for targets, White allies, and bystanders which include making the invisible visible, disarming the microaggression, educating the perpetrator, and seeking external support. These simple yet effective microinterventions may substantially help adoptive parents and adoptive children mitigate some of the harmful racialized experiences that occur (see Sue et al., 2019 for a detailed review). By engaging in their own continued learning and education related to diversity and multiculturalism, adoptive parents would be better prepared to welcome diversity into the family as well as explore and learn about the adoptee’s heritage, ethnic names, and culture of origin. Simultaneously, increased diversity-related discussions may also give the adopted children permission to further explore and engage in these topics. These steps, in turn, may help facilitate the process of racial and ethnic socialization.
Finally, as reported by adoptees, adoptee socialization and exposure to other adoptees/adoptee groups were salient factors in the development of adoptee socialization skills and navigating transracial spaces and identities. In the present sample, this occurred at higher rates in more diverse communities where adoptee groups were formed and exist. Access to adult transracial adoptees was profound for adoptees in their efforts to build community, normalize, and make sense of being raised in a White family, and in general to better understand the unique possibilities and range of identities within the transracial adoptee communities (E. J. Kim, 2010; McGinnis et al., 2009; Pate, 2014). Practitioners working with transracial adoptees should be cognizant of adoptee socialization as an important resource. Through adoptee socialization, adoptees have the potential to learn about adoption and identity-related concerns earlier in life than previous generations of transracial adoptees, which may be life-altering and promote healing and wellness.
Footnotes
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.
