Research Findings On Stepparent Adoption

While doing some research on the Internet this evening, I came across a wonderful article that I simply had to share. The article is from the Stepfamily Association of America. The Association has a very informative and easy to use website, I will be sure to put a link at the bottom of the page so that others may check out the rest of the website. This particular article, on the website, discusses the research findings on a few different studies done on stepparent adoption, as well as the motives behind stepparent adoptions.

The article also states, what I have found to be all too true, that there is little information out there regarding stepparent adoption. Even with stepparent adoptions being the most common form of adoption, information on the subject is scarce. However, many individuals, such as myself, are working hard to get more information out to families who are in need of advice on stepparent adoption, in all areas and facets of the subject.

Research Findings
Contemplating Stepchild Adoption

Written by Kay Pasley*, STEPFAMILIES, Winter 1998

Three members of SAA Research committee (Drs. Lawrence Ganong, Marilyn Coleman, and Mark Fine) had the results of a study on the issues and motivations for stepchild adoption published in a recent issue of Family Relations. While the results are from a small sample (32 adults, 22 children, from 16 stepfamilies), they are interesting and provide some insight into concerns that surround the adoption process in stepfamilies. I summarize their findings for you and include their suggestions for practice and policy.

Few empirical studies exist on stepchild adoption. The notable exception is a study by Wolf and Mast (1987) of 55 adoptions by stepparents that found motives for adoption included name changes, family unity, a good relationship between the stepparent and stepchild, transferring legal rights to stepparents, the request of adoptees, and severing ties from the nonresident parent. Ganong and associates wanted to determine what factors stepparents considered when contemplating adoption and the motivations of stepmembers for adoption. They interviewed 16 stepfamilies as part of a larger project, including children between the ages of 10 and 19 living in the household. The stepfamilies included 14 stepfather-mother households and two stepfather-stepmother households.

While only one stepfamily experienced adoption, all others considered doing so. They found that thinking about and discussing adoption depended on the level of involvement of the nonresident parent. When the nonresident parent was actively involved or “somewhat regularly involved,” then adoption was not given serious consideration by either the adults or the children. However, more serious consideration was given when the relationship between the nonresident parent and child was not particularly close but contact was maintained. In these cases, the reluctance to adopt was related to anticipating a hostile legal proceeding and interactions with the nonresident parent over termination of parental rights.
Other barriers to pursuing adoption reported by both adults and children were related to financial issues, such as the loss of financial support to the child (e.g., child support, money for college expenses). In addition, stepparents frequently mentioned that adoption meant they would have financial responsibility for the stepchild should the remarriage end, as well as expressing concern over the actual costs of the adoption procedure.

The findings from this study indicated several motivations for stepchild adoption that reflect the earlier findings from Wolf and Mask (1987). These include the desire to become like a nuclear family, removal of some of the daily hassles of being a stepfamily (e.g., different last names), concern over what would happen if the resident parent died, and the lack of a legally recognized relationship. Interestingly, however, stepfathers thought more about adoption than did parents, and stepchildren also considered adoption more than did parents.

Clearly, the study suggests that members in stepfamilies construct their idea of family from the nuclear family model, such that when relationships felt close and connected, members wanted their relationships to be recognized. Adoption was one way to legitimize these meaningful relationships. The authors argue that adoption is a means to normalize stepfamily relationships. They suggest we look to other models for creating stepfamily relationships, such as those that appear in African-American communities where “other mothers” have recognized and valued roles in the process of child rearing (see Hooks, 1984: Hill Collins, 1990). In other words, other mothers assist biological mothers in parenting responsibilities. Applied to a stepparent role, this model of other mothers might provide another way of thinking about parenting and encourage a different way of thinking about family where the boundaries are extended beyond the immediate household. The authors suggest that the concept of other mother might be a means to a legitimate the role for stepparents.

In terms of policy, if the experiences of these stepfamilies are common among stepfamilies in general, then developing social policy that promotes a legally recognized relationship between stepparents and stepchildren without termination of nonresident parent ties may be worthy of consideration. Mahoney’s (1994) suggestion of “incomplete adoptions” currently recognized in some states is offered as one solution. Here, nonresident parents and their extended family are permitted to continue contact after stepparent adoption. Furthermore, England’s Children Act 1989 provides an alternate way of thinking about parental responsibility and allows for a stepparent who has been married to the parent for two years to petition for a legal relationship to the stepchild even over the objections of the nonresident parent. If granted, the petition gives the stepparent the same legal rights and responsibilities as those of the parents. (For additional information on this British legislation, see Masson, 1992).

References:

Ganong, L.H., Coleman, M., Fine, M.A., & McDaniel, A.K. (1998). Issues considered in contemplating stepchild adoption. Family Relations, 47, 63-71.

Hill Collins, P. (1990). Black Feminist Thought. New York: Routledge.

Hook, B. (1984). From Margin to Center. Boston, MA: South End Press.

Mahoney, M.M. (1994), Stepfamilies and the Law. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

Masson, J. (1992), Stepping in the nineties: A summary of the legal implications of the Children Act of 1989 for stepfamilies. In B. Dimmock (Ed.), A step in both directions (pp. 4-16). London, UK: National Stepfamily Association.

Wolf, P.A., & Mast, E. (1987). Counseling issues in adoption by stepparents. Social Work, 32. 69-74.

* Kay Pasley is the Chair of the SAA Research Committee, and is on the faculty at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro.

To access the Stepfamily Association of America, please click here.

You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.