Search

In the United States the debate concerning transracial adoption and gay and/ or lesbian adoption has been going on since the 1970s. This research used the co-cultural theory of communication to explore how the marginalized population of gay and lesbian transracial adoptive (TRA) parents communicated with the other culturally dominant members of their society. It then analyzed the communication behaviors found to see if any differences existed in their interactions. Finally, the communication behaviors were examined to see what impact they might have on the ability of parents to be effective TRA parents. This research included eight in-depth interviews with gay and lesbian TRA parents. In these interviews, these parents were asked to explain, through their own 7 personal experiences, what it was like to be part of this cultural group. Their experiences were then analyzed using the methods described in the co-cultural communication theory. Results showed that gay and lesbian TRA parents predominantly employed the assertive accommodation and the nonassertive assimilation communication orientations in their interactions with others. Of the two, the parents overwhelmingly employed assertive accommodation. Results showed three important differences regarding how the parents employed communication orientations or enacted co-cultural practices in their interactions. Results also showed that the employment of the assertive accommodation orientation was likely to have a positive effect on the parents' ability to be effective TRA parents. The employment of the nonassertive assimilation orientation was found generally to have t mixed results. I hope that insight into the communication behaviors of this population found through this study will help clarify the most effective communication methods for these parents to learn in order to raise healthy and happy children of color.

My thesis, "Love and Violence in Transracial/national Adoption," examines a New York Times special transracial adoption blog series, "Relative Choices," to critically interrogate how love and violence operate in adoption discourse. In doing so, it explores two main questions: How have transracial/national adoptions been posited in the past and how does that inform current articulations? Second, how would a global/historical framework help rethink transracial/national adoptions beyond one based on the local/present? Specifically, I am interested in how a global/historical framework, on a larger level, disrupts our understandings of narratives of love, inclusion and progress and, on an individual family or particular level, how does such a framework challenge the strict constructions of the family, and then lastly, on both levels how does it reveal the productive violence at play? I argue that the normative narrative of adoption discourse has shifted from assimilation overdrive to the embracement of colorblindness and liberal multiculturalism through claims of inclusion, progression, and revolution. The condition of possibility for these assertions is mobilized by the ability of many adoptive supporters, parents and even adoptees to strategically place adoption in a local/ present framework. This positioning individualizes, depoliticizes, ahistoricizes transracial/national adoption, and it enables love to operate as the encompassing and guiding principle for adoption. While the concept and role of love is no doubt integral to the act (commitment) and process of adoption, its presence and hypervisibility obscures how the global and historical play important roles in shaping adoption. Specifically, the local/present framework erases and obfuscates the productive and political symbolic violence of transracial/national adoption.