§ 1 Preference for adopting children shall be
given to:
(a) relatives;
(b) families of the same race or
ethnicity of the child;
(c) families of different racial and
ethnic heritage that demonstrate
awareness, understanding, and
appreciation of child's racial heritage
and a willingness to promote positive
racial or ethnic identity in the child;
(d) families willing to develop such
awareness, understanding, and
appreciation through counseling
including training in how to promote the
child's racial or ethnic identity.
§ 2 When a child becomes available for an
adoptive placement, the agency has no more
than 12 months to place the child with a
family under § 1(a) or (b). During this time
the agency shall:
(a) actively recruit relatives or
same-race families;
(b) contact community-based
organizations that recruit same-race
families, or, if none exist, any other
such organizations willing to locate
same-race families; and
(c) screen potential adoptive
families under categories § 1(c) or §
1(d) to determine their suitability for
adopting a child of a different race or
ethnicity.
|
This Model Statute has several aspects which allow it to
strike an appropriate balance between permanent placement of
a child and placement in an environment that is best able to
promote the child's racial identity. First, there is a
same-race preference. This is in the best interests of
the child because it encourages placement of the child in an
"adoptive family [that] is able to deal with racial
issues that may be faced by the adopted child."
Second, the statute proposes an absolute time restriction on
the amount of time that the child should be held for a
same-race family to be available. This should
alleviate any concerns that social workers are abusing their
discretion by creating excessive delays in the placement of
Black children.
Third, the statute requires the agency to recruit
same-race families. This requirement is supplemented
by having the agency contact community-based organizations
to locate same-race families. Involving
community-based organizations help to alleviate any concerns
that effective recruiting efforts have not been made -- a
critical issue considering the past ineffectiveness of
agency-led recruitment efforts. Finally, it allows the
agency to screen potential families during the
"hold" period to determine their ability to
promote positive racial identity in the child. This
would allow a child to be placed with an eligible family
under s 1(c) or (d) immediately following the conclusion of
the twelve month recruitment period. The screening
should attempt to determine whether the potential adoptive
parents have racist or prejudicial attitudes, live in an
integrated neighborhood, and regularly socialize with
members of the child's racial heritage.
Professor Elizabeth Bartholet argues that no delay
in placement should take place because it causes
discontinuity and disruption and risks further delays.
However, this argument flatly ignores the critical need to
develop positive racial identity in Black children and
simply values permanent placement over any other
concerns. While the data on the effects of the
disruption in bonding of a child are inconclusive at best,
the proposed Model Statute contains an absolute time limit,
thus eliminating any risk of continual delays in placing the
child.
One key aspect of the Model Statute is that it
requires agencies to screen potential adoptive parents in an
effort to determine the families' ability to promote
positive racial identity. Agencies should examine
several factors, including: residence in an integrated
community with integrated schooling, the ability to provide
a social support group of Black peers and role models, the
presence of race bias or lack of racial awareness and
sensitivity, and the willingness to promote positive racial
identity in the home.
The screening process gives some assurance that
white adoptive families understand the importance of
developing racial identity in their child. It also
serves to prevent families who have racist or prejudicial
attitudes, or who exhibit an unwillingness to confront
racial issues, from adopting Black children.
Thus, a carefully drafted statute defines the
interests of children -- placement in a permanent home that
enables the child to develop a positive racial identity --
and prevents decision-makers from acting outside of those
interests. Only by understanding these goals and the
underlying reasons for their importance can changes be
implemented which truly serve the best interests of the
child. . . .
All things being equal, Black children should be
raised in Black homes. Thus, there must be some
preference for same-race families. This does not mean
that any child should be deprived of a permanent
family. Long-term foster care is not the solution to
any child placement problem. However, it is equally
callous to prevent a Black child from developing a positive
Black identity -- something vital to the development of a
healthy self-concept in all Black children. Thus,
equal weight must be given to these considerations. |