A Nationally Representative Comparison of Black and White Adoptive Parents of Black

Children

SEHSD Working Paper #2017-10

Paper presented at the annual meetings of the American Sociology AssociationSeattle, WA, August 20–23, 2016

***

Rose M. Kreider and Elizabeth RaleighFertility and Family Statistics Branch, US Census Bureau and Carleton College, respectively

** Disclaimer **

This paper is released to inform interested parties of ongoing research and to encourage discussion of work in progress. The views expressed on statistical or methodological issues are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the U.S. Census Bureau.

1

IntroductionIn 1972, the National Association of Black Social Workers (NABSW) released a

statement in strong opposition to the transracial adoption of Black children by White parents.

Decrying “the placement of Black children in White homes for any reason,” they affirmed “the

inviolable position of Black children in Black families where they belong physically,

psychology, and culturally” (National Association of Black Social Workers, 1972).

The publication of the statement spurred a national debate over the merits of the

NABSW’s argument that “Black children in White homes are cut off from the healthy

development of themselves as Black people” (ibid). Proponents of the practice pointed to

research that found high levels of social and personal adjustment among Black transracial

adoptees (Grow and Shapiro, 1974). In addition, advocates for transracial adoption fervently

argued that without transracial adoption these children would languish in foster care (Bartholet,

2000).

Rita J. Simon and Howard Alstein were among the most vocal researchers, writing

prolifically on the case for transracial adoption (1977, 1994, 2000, 2001). In their earliest book,

published a few years after the NABSW’s statement, Simon and Alstein reviewed the literature

on the outcomes of transracially adopted children, asserting that cross racial placements are far

better alternatives to “the often dire effects of long-term institutionalization or, to a lesser degree,

the insecurity of foster placement” (1977, p. 22).

In response to these conclusions, opponents of transracial adoption rallied against the

notion that the only alternative to transracial adoption was foster care, countering that there were

ample numbers of Black families eager to adopt who faced unreasonable hurdles and systematic

discrimination by White social workers. They point to the conclusion of the NABSW’s

2

statement, which “Denounce[d] the assertions that Blacks will not adopt,” and argued that

transracial placements would be “totally unnecessary” if Black families were not subject to the

“screening out device” of “the obstacle course of the traditional adoption process.” The NABSW

argued for expanded recruitment of Black adoptive families, urging a commitment to “the re-

orientation of the Black family, permitting sight to the strengths therein” (National Association

of Black Social Workers, 1972).

Despite the NABSW’s call for favoring race matching for Black children, over the last

forty-four years there has been a marked shift towards a race-neutral, colorblind adoption policy.

For example, the passage of the 1994 Multi-Ethnic Placement Act (MEPA) prohibited adoption

agencies receiving federal funding from taking race into account in their placement decisions

(Jennings, 2006). Notably, the language in the 1994 provision included a clause requiring

publicly funded agencies to diligently recruit a racially diverse pool of parents, but this loophole

was largely eliminated two years later when the act was reconfigured as the Inter-Ethnic

Placement Act (IEP) (McRoy et al., 1997). The amended MEPA-IEP underscored that “delaying

or denying a child’s foster care or adoptive placement on the basis of the child or family’s race,

color, or national origin” would not be tolerated (ibid). Together, these laws mandated a

colorblind approach to adoptive placements that was meant to increase the permanent placement

of Black children in adoptive families. Despite the measures put in place to facilitate the

transracial placement of Black children in White homes, we know that most adoptive parents,

regardless of race, choose to adopt a child of the same race (Ishizawa and Kubo, 2014).

Moreover, Black children, especially boys, are the least likely to be adopted from foster care

(Brooks, James, and Barth, 2002).

3

As the debate surrounding transracial adoption churns on, it is important to note that we

know relatively little about families who adopt Black children – whether within race or across

race – especially at the population level. Data from the 2009-2011 American Community Survey

indicate that Black children are overrepresented among adopted children, 16 percent versus 13

percent of biological and stepchildren (Kreider and Lofquist, 2014). In addition, while 16 percent

of adopted children are Black, just 13 percent of adopted children live with a Black householder

(Kreider and Lofquist, 2014). In other words, there are more Black children in adoptive families

than there are Black adoptive parents. This finding suggests that when studying Black adopted

children, including transracial adoptive families is an important piece of the puzzle. But, given

that there are more Black adopted children in Black families than in White ones, it is integral to

shift the focus to include analyses of Black adoptive parents as well.

While there is a sizeable body of research on White adoptive parents’ approaches to

Black transracial parenting (Moosnick, 2004; Smith et al., 2011), there are few extant studies

with an explicit focus on Black adoptive parents. One reason for this oversight may be that 78

percent of adopted children have a White parent (Kreider and Lofquist, 2014), a figure that is

disproportionate to the population of White parents raising biological children. Another reason

for the relative absence of Black adoptive parents in the literature is that research shows 95

percent of Black adoptive parents adopt a child of the same race (Raleigh, 2012). Perhaps

because Black same-race adoptive families are not as visible – nor as controversial – as

transracial adoptive families, they have received less attention from social scientists.

The goal of this paper is to provide a nationally representative profile of parents who

have adopted Black children. Considering that these children are the personification of an

ideological debate on race relations in the United States, we argue that it is vital to develop a

4

better understanding of these families. We seek to bridge an important gap in the literature by

identifying and describing key national benchmarks about Black adopted children raised by

either White or Black adoptive parents.

Research Questions

Our research questions focus on providing a profile of White, non-Hispanic and Black adoptive

parents of Black children.1 We focus on two questions:

1. What are the demographic characteristics of White and Black adoptive parents of Black

children?

2. How do White and Black adoptive parents with Black children compare with each other?

Review of the Literature

Why focus on Black adopted children?

Among social scientists, there has been a growing consensus that the racial divide is

becoming crudely trifurcated among Whites, so-called honorary Whites, and Blacks (Bonilla–

Silva, 2004). Whereas some Asians and Hispanics are able to assimilate as honorary Whites,

scholars note that Blacks face greater discrimination and barriers to social incorporation (Warren

and Twine, 1999; Yancey, 2003). This racial hierarchy is visible across numerous measures of

socioeconomic status such as educational attainment, labor force participation, residential

segregation, and health (see Charles, 2003; DiTomaso, Post, and Parks-Yancy, 2007; Phelan and

Link, 2015; Reardon and Owens, 2014 for reviews).

In addition, research on racial attitudes consistently points to a greater perceived social

distance between Whites and Blacks compared to Whites and non-Black racial minorities (Bobo

1From this point on, we refer to White, non-Hispanic adults as White.

5

and Charles, 2009; Bobo et al., 2012). This emerging divide is especially apparent when asking

Whites about forming familial relationships across race through interracial marriage (Perry,

2014). Whereas studies generally find strong support for interracial marriage, fewer Whites say

that they would be comfortable with a family member marrying a Black person than any other

racial minority (Djamba and Kimuna, 2014). Taken together, these stark findings have led some

race scholars to argue that the American color line is changing from a White/non-White divide to

a Black/non-Black divide.

Lee and Bean (2010) characterize this evolution as a “diversity paradox,” arguing:

While the country exhibits a new diversity, and while intermarriage and multiraciality are projected to increase in the foreseeable future, the rates as intermarriage and multiracial reporting are occurring at various speeds for different groups, and the pace for blacks is the slowest. The unevenness of these suggests that boundaries are dissolving more rapidly for new immigrant groups such as Asians and Latinos, than for blacks (p. 186).

This racial distance between Whites and Blacks is visible in adoption such that the

transracial adoption of Black children is often seen as distinct from the transracial adoption of

Asian or Hispanic children. The difference between these types of placements is seen as so great

that adoption caseworkers often employ different language, referring to the placement of Black

children as transracial (Butler-Sweet, 2011; Fenster, 2005; Katz and Doyle, 2013; Kennedy,

1994), while many White parents prefer to characterize the adoption of foreign-born Asian or

Hispanic children as transnational or intercountry adoptions (Dubinsky, 2008; Jacobson, 2008;

Zhang and Lee, 2011).

Perhaps because of the controversies surrounding placing Black children with White

parents, there is far more extant research on transracial adoption than same-race Black adoptions.

Many studies focus on the well-being and adjustment of transracial adoptees, examining topics

such as racial identity development among children (see Hollingsworth, 1997 for review;), racial

6

socialization practices by parents (Barn, 2013; Smith et al., 2011; Thomas and Tessler, 2007),

and the experiences of adult transracial adoptees (Patton, 2000; Samuels, 2009).

There is also a growing canon of work by adoption scholars identifying and describing

the racial hierarchy of adoption which positions Asian and Hispanic children as preferable to

Black children (Khanna and Killian, 2015; Quiroz, 2007; Raleigh, 2016). For example, in her

study of White parents with Chinese-born children, Dorow illustrates how White parents’

decisions to adopt from China “take on racial-cultural coherence through an imagined

intractability in White-Black difference alongside an imagined Asian flexibility” (2006, p. 376).

Summarizing this trend, Kubo notes in a review of the literature, “The common discourse that is

engendered from their stories is that the racial division between White and Black is too wide to

cross, in contrast to the differences between Whites and Asians” (2010, p. 281).

While these studies are useful in showing how racial hierarchies play out in adoption,

they are limited because they are based on small sample sizes that cannot be applied to the

population at large. Prior to Census 2000, which began to differentiate between adopted and step

children (Kreider, 2003), there was a dearth of nationally representative data on adoptive

families. Since then, there has been a growth of population-based research studying adoptive

families in general (Amato and Cheadle, 2008; Hamilton, et al., 2007), and transracial adoptive

families in particular (Ishizawa et al., 2006; Raleigh and Kao, 2013; Selman, 2009).

Most recently, the release of the National Survey of Adoptive Parents has enabled

researchers to paint a more detailed national picture of adoption, especially about the type of

adoptions (e.g. foster care, domestic, or international) parents pursue (Vandivere et al., 2009).

These data have been particularly helpful in showing that Black children tend to be adopted

either through foster care or private domestic adoption (Ishizawa and Kubo, 2014, see p. 649).

7

One drawback of the survey is that since adoptive parents are more likely to be White, the

sample of Black adoptive parents is too small for detailed analyses (77 percent of the sample is

White). Moreover, because of the preference among White parents for White, Asian, or Hispanic

children, there are relatively few Black adopted children in the sample (n = 272) (ibid).

Jacobson and colleagues also use the NSAP in conjunction with a five percent subsample

of the U.S. Census to examine the racial composition of transracial adoptive families (2012).

Their work establishes some interesting national benchmarks about transracial adoption, showing

how transracial adoption is associated with higher income and education levels, but only for

White parents with Asian and Hispanic children and not White parents with Black children. In

addition, they find that Black children are among the least likely to be adopted by White parents,

“suggesting that much of the adoption of Black children is by Black families” (Jacobson et al.,

2012, p. 80). But since the authors’ focus was on transracial adoption, their study does not

include a demographic profile of Black adoptive parents.

Notably, extant national research on Black adopted children tends to treat Black children

as a monolithic group, ignoring potential differences between biracial and monoracial Blacks. In

some ways this practice makes sense given the legacy of hypodescent such that persons with

“one drop” of Black heritage were considered Black (Davis, 1991). Research suggests that

hypodescent remains a powerful model of racial identification for African Americans (Harris and

Sim, 2002), with parents of Black-White biracial children more likely to identify their sons and

daughters as Black (Tafoya et al., 2004).

Whereas it may be that Black adoptive parents are likely to racially identify their children

as Black regardless of whether they have multiracial ancestry, it is unclear whether White

adoptive parents abide by the same model. In fact, qualitative research suggests otherwise. In

8

previous work, Raleigh has shown how White parents differentiate between biracial (part-White)

children and “full” Black children such that the former are seen as more desirable than the latter

(2016). Thus, it may be that White transracial adoptive parents are more likely to adopt a Black

child identified as more than one race whereas Black adoptive parents may not have a similar

preference.

Prior Research on Black Adoptive Parents

The bulk of published work on Black adoptive parents is based on a social work

perspective and tends to be based on convenience samples. For example, Prater and King (1988)

published one of the earliest studies on Black adoptive families, but the article was a brief

research note based on a regional convenience sample of 12 adoptive parents. A year later,

Hairston and Williams (1989) conducted a study based on 53 Black adoptive families, and found

that Black parents’ reasons for adopting were quite similar to that of White parents in that

infertility was a driving factor. Moreover, these families shared a similar demographic

background with White adoptive parents since most of their respondents were college educated.

These findings are surprising considering that at the population level, Black families have lower

levels of educational attainment (National Center for Education Statistics, 2015). Since little

research has been done focusing on Black adoptive parents, it is unclear whether these findings

pan out in the national data or if they are a result of a small and potentially biased qualitative

sample.

Since these early studies, two main topics have emerged in the occasional research

focused on Black adoptive families. The first is an examination of Black children’s outcomes in

same-race adoptive families (Alexander et al., 2004; Gillum and O’Brien, 2010; Schwartz and

9

Austin, 2011; Smith-McKeever, 2006). Another vein of research has examined best practices for

promoting adoption among African Americans (Hollingsworth, 1997; McRoy et al., 1997).

Given the disproportionate number of Black children in foster care awaiting adoption, most of

these studies tend to focus on publically-funded adoptions (Gillum and O’Brien, 2010; see

Smith-McKeever and McRoy, 2005 for an exception).

In a review of the literature on Black families who adopt Black children, Gillum surmises

that the “major theme” of the research is that studies are sporadically published and not easily

replicable (2011, p. 327). Notably, Gillum ends her review with a call for a “continued research

focus on Black adoptive families,” arguing that an expanded knowledge about these families can

“provide data that can be used in addressing their needs” (ibid, p. 328). However, in the years

following the publication of the review, there has not been a renewed push to publish in this area.

While there is a growing body of research questioning why and how Black children

become available for adoption (Briggs, 2012; Roberts, 2002), social scientists have paid very

little attention to Black adoptive families. This absence is notable considering the sizeable body

of work on Black families in general (Furstenberg, 2007 for review). One factor accounting for

this exclusion may be the fact that there are higher rates of informal and kinship adoptions

among African Americans (Gibson et al., 2005, Sandven and Resnick, 1990; Stack, 1974), thus

making studies of formal adoptions less of a focus.

Some recent qualitative studies peripherally include analyses of Black adoptive families,

mostly through the lens of queer family formation. Moore’s (2011) work on the intersection of

race, class, and sexual orientation provides a valuable look at marginalized Black motherhood,

but only a small fraction of the women she interviews became mothers through adoption (see p.

132). Additionally, Goldberg’s (2012) research on gay adoptive fathers includes a handful of

10

non-White men in the study, but not enough to lend a substantive look into Black adoptive

parenthood.

Missing from these analyses is a comprehensive national depiction of Black adopted

children and their families. In the following pages, we aim to provide a detailed description of

the demographic composition of parents who adopt Black children. Formulating a greater

understanding of who adopts Black children is integral to pushing the conversation about

adoption forward. Importantly, we do not seek to weigh in on the contentious debate surrounding

transracial adoption. Rather, our goal is to provide a national benchmark of Black adoptive

parents so that researchers have a better understanding of these families, particularly Black

adoptive parents of Black children.

Data and Analysis Plan

This paper will use the internal 2010-2014 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year

data. Since we are looking at a relatively small population—White or Black householders who

report an adopted child who is Black alone or Black multiracial—the 5-year file is the best

available data.2 The internal file provides a larger sample than the Public Use Microdata Sample

(PUMS) data.

The ACS contains a wealth of data describing characteristics of the parents, their

children, and their households. Since place of birth is collected, it is possible to get an indirect

measure of internationally adopted children. ACS also has measures of disability for those aged

5 and over, including hearing, vision, cognitive, ambulatory or self-care disability.

2 For information on when to use 1-year, 3-year, or 5-year ACS estimates, please visit: http://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/guidance/estimates.html.

11

We compare three groups of parents. We focus on White (group 1) and Black alone

householders (group 2) who have an adopted child under 18 in their household who is identified

as Black alone or Black in combination with another race or races. In the descriptive tables, we

also show White parents who have a spouse who is other than White (group 3). Since the ACS

sample is large enough for us to look at this group separately, we compare them on demographic

characteristics in order to see whether they are a distinct group. Because respondents are simply

reporting a living arrangement, we do not have information about whether the adoption occurred

through the public foster care system, was privately arranged, or whether the parent was related

to the child before they were adopted (e.g., grandchild or stepchild). This limits our interpretation

because the 'adopted' category also includes some children who started out as stepchildren, or are

the biological child of the householder's unmarried partner, and he or she reports the child as

their adopted son or daughter.

We show descriptive profiles of these parents (families). In addition to these descriptive

analyses, we also run logistic regression models predicting whether adoptive parents of Black

children are White or Black. While those of other races adopt Black children, we exclude these

groups since we expect they will be too small to be meaningful in the context of controlling for

multiple characteristics of the parent/family in this analysis.3 The models are not causal, but

allow us to see which characteristics are more common for Black adoptive parents compared

with White.

Key Independent Variables

3 Although as stated earlier, we are using ‘White’ to refer to White non-Hispanic, keep in mind that ‘Black’ includes Black Hispanics.

12

To examine demographic differences between White and Black adoptive parents, we

focus on four key variables regarding the adopted child: sex, disability, multiracial identification,

and immigration status.

Sex

We know from prior research that adoptive parents often prefer girls (Chandra et al.,

1999). It is unclear whether this preference extends to Black adoptive parents. To evaluate

whether there are differences in child’s sex across these groups, we create a sex ratio that

measures the proportion of adopted girls to boys. We hypothesize that adoptive parents,

regardless of race, will be more likely than their counterparts with biological children to adopt

girls. But, given prevalence of gendered stereotypes associating Black male youth with

delinquent behavior (Rios, 2011), we also hypothesize that White parents who adopt transracially

will be the most likely to adopt girls. While we show the sex ratio in the descriptive table, we do

not add it to the models, since it is a group level characteristic rather than an individual one.

Disability

In the past, it used to be that Black children available for adoption were often labeled as

‘harder to place’ or ‘special needs’ (Herman, 2008). Despite this uniform label, social scientists

know very little about the disability status of Black adopted children (Bramlett, 2010; also see

Kreider and Cohen, 2009 for a population analysis of disability among international adoptees

from Africa). We hypothesize that White parents, who cross the color line when adopting, are

less likely to adopt a child with a disability than Black parents adopting Black children. In the

model, we operationalize this measure by indicating parents who have adopted at least one Black

child with at least one disability. For those who do not have children under age 5, and thus do not

have data for the disability questions, we include a dummy variable indicating this.

13

Multiracial Identification

Prior research on the ‘market’ value of adoptable children indicates biracial Black/White

children are in greater demand than monoracial Black children, at least among White adoptive

parents (Blackstone et al., 2008; Krawiec, 2010; Quiroz, 2007). Thus, we expect to see a higher

proportion of multiracial Black children living with White adoptive parents than with Black

adoptive parents.

It is important to note that U.S. Census Bureau’s race data are based on self-reported

identities. Prior sociological research has shown Black parents are the least likely to name their

multiracial children as more than one race (Rockquemore and Brunsma, 2007; Tafoya et al.,

2004). It is possible that this trend is carried out among Black adoptive parents as well. In

contrast, it is possible that White adoptive parents with Black children may want to emphasize

their children’s multiracial heritage and may be more likely to identify their son or daughter as

more than one race. Thus, we may over-estimate the differences in the prevalence of Black

multiracial children in Black versus White adoptive families. Since we are comparing parents,

and not children, the measure we use is whether the parent has at least one adopted Black child

who is identified as multiracial.

Immigration Status

Qualitative research suggests that a small, but growing, number of Black parents are

taking advantage of the increase of international adoptions from Africa (Raleigh, 2016).

However, at the population level, we know that parents who use international adoption are

disproportionately White (Ishizawa et al., 2006). Yet earlier studies may not have captured the

growing number of African adoptions (Davis, 2011). The combined 2010-2014 ACS data are

well situated to capture the increase in transnational adoptions from Africa and the Caribbean

14

that occurred at the turn of the millennium (U.S. Department of State, 2015A; U.S. Department

of State, 2015B). We hypothesize that a higher proportion of White parents of Black children

will have internationally adopted children. We code immigration status to indicate parents who

have at least one Black adopted child who is foreign born.

Adopted Parent Variables

To help us better understand the profiles of parents with Black adopted children, we include a

series of control variables including current living arrangements, marital history, educational

attainment, labor force participation, home ownership, and geographic region of residence. The

models are not causal, but allow us to compare White and Black adoptive parents of Black

children in a multivariate context.

Results

Table 1 provides estimates for descriptive characteristics of adoptive parents of Black

children, for the three groups of parents. White parents are more likely to have a spouse present

—73 percent, compared with 44 percent of Black parents. All of the White intermarried parents

are married, by definition. More than twice the proportion of Black parents are mothers with no

spouse or partner present (44 percent), compared with White parents (18 percent). Black parents

(28 percent) are more likely than White parents (24 percent) to have been married more than

once.4

Since adoptive parents tend to be quite educated, we show ‘graduate or professional

school degree’ as a category separate from ‘bachelor’s degree’ in Table 1. However, for a more

4 The percentage of White intermarried parents who have been married more than once (27 percent), does not differ statistically from the estimates for either of the other two groups.

15

basic comparison, we add the two categories together, and find that White parents have more

education than Black parents, with 53 percent having at least a bachelor’s degree, compared with

25 percent for Black parents. The difference between White intermarried parents and White is

smaller than that between Black and White parents. Forty-seven percent of White intermarried

parents have at least a bachelor’s degree. The proportion of Black parents with at least a

bachelor’s degree (25 percent) is higher than the percent for all Black alone adults aged 25 and

over (22 percent).5 The proportion of White adoptive parents with at least a bachelor’s degree

(53 percent) is higher than for all White adults aged 25 and over (36 percent), and greater than

the difference seen for Blacks.6

The contrasts in labor force participation among the three groups show a similar pattern

to educational attainment. The difference between White and White intermarried parents is not

statistically significant, although both groups differ from Black parents. The percentage of Black

parents who are unemployed is more than twice that of White or White intermarried parents.

While about 80 percent of White and White intermarried parents were employed (79 and 77

percent, respectively), just 68 percent of Black parents were employed. These differences in

labor force participation make sense given the poverty levels for the groups. While 9 percent of

White parents’ households and 6 percent of White intermarried households are below the poverty

level, this was the case for more than one quarter (28 percent) of Black adoptive parents’

households. This economic gap is also found in homeownership, with 50 percent of Black

parents renting their homes, while just 17 percent of White parents and 23 percent of White

intermarried parents rented their home.

5 Estimates for all adults, rather than the adoptive parents, are from the 2014 Current Population Survey. See Table 1-04: http://www.census.gov/hhes/socdemo/education/data/cps/2014/Table%201-04.xlsx6 Estimates for all adults, rather than the adoptive parents, are from the 2014 Current Population Survey. See Table 1-03: http://www.census.gov/hhes/socdemo/education/data/cps/2014/Table%201-03.xlsx

16

Unsurprisingly, Black parents had the highest percentage living in the South, at 54

percent, compared with 30 percent for White parents and 36 percent for White intermarried

parents. This reflects the fact that the proportion of the overall population who are Black is

higher in the South than in the country as a whole.7 Comparing the three groups of parents,

White intermarried parents had the highest percentage living in the West (30 percent, compared

with 22 percent for White, and 9 percent for Black parents), which reinforces findings in earlier

work about intermarriage being more prevalent there (Wang, 2012, pg. 45). The largest

proportion of White parents, one-third, live in the Midwest.

In terms of the characteristics of their Black adopted children, Black parents were the

group most likely to have a child aged 12-17 as their youngest—42 percent compared with

around 30 percent for the other two groups of parents. The ratio of adopted girls to boys varied

little across the three groups, with a ratio of 0.9 for White parents, and 1.1 for Black parents, and

1.0 for White intermarried parents. White and White intermarried parents were more likely to

have at least one Black adopted child identified as multiracial—43 percent for White parents,

and 48 percent for White intermarried parents, while this was the case for only 6 percent of

Black parents. Because an adopted son/daughter is reported by the respondent and includes those

who are stepchildren, this may help, in part, to explain the higher proportion of multiracial

children living with White intermarried parents. However, the percentage for White intermarried

parents is higher than that for White parents, so perhaps this may reflect a tendency for White

parents to identify their Black children as multiracial far more often than a Black parent would

do so.

7 In 2010, 19.2 percent of the population in the South were Black, compared with 12.6 percent in the United States as a whole. See Table GCT-P3 in American FactFinder http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=DEC_10_SF1_GCTP3.US02PR&prodType=table.

17

White parents have the highest percentage with at least one foreign-born child (14

percent), followed by White intermarried parents (7 percent) and Black parents (3 percent). For

parents with at least one Black adopted child aged 5 and over, 15 percent of White intermarried

parents have at least one child with a disability. This is not statistically different from White

parents (14 percent), while Black parents have a lower percentage (11 percent).

The multivariate model (see Table 2) allows us to compare groups of adoptive parents

while simultaneously controlling for various characteristics. Since the group of White

intermarried parents is quite small, we combine them with the other White parents, and simply

compare Black parents with all of the White adoptive parents.8 This allows us to get a more

nuanced sense of which of the apparent differences between Black and White parents remain

after we control for demographic and socioeconomic characteristics. The logistic regression

model is ‘predicting’ which parents are Black, and essentially compares characteristics against

those of White parents. It is not a causal model.

As expected, the gaps seen in Table 1 for several characteristics also hold in the model.

Black parents are significantly more likely to be a mother without a spouse or partner, and less

likely to have a bachelor’s or professional degree than White parents. They are less likely to own

their home and more likely to live in the South. The difference in poverty is not significant,

likely because other characteristics such as education, home ownership and labor force

participation may outweigh it in the multivariate context.

Black parents are less likely than White adoptive parents to have a multiracial child or a

foreign-born child. The difference in the proportion with at least one child with a disability is not

significant.

8 A model run excluding the White intermarried parents provides essentially the same results.

18

Discussion

This paper presents some of the first national benchmarks of Black children in adoptive

families. Although some of our results are not surprising – e.g., Black adoptive parents on

average hail from lower socioeconomic status households – other findings did not align with our

original hypotheses.9 For example, given that prior research has found that prospective adoptive

parents often have a preference for girls (Ward-Gailey, 2010), it is notable that there are not

significant differences in gender ratios between these groups of adoptive parents. While these

data do not show a higher proportion of girls for adoptive parents of Black children, the reader

should keep in mind that all kinds of adoption are included in these data. The respondent may

report their spouse or partner’s biological child as their adopted child regardless of whether they

have legally adopted them. Adoptions finalized through the public foster care system are

included along with private and international adoptions.

When considering the disability data, it is perhaps a bit surprising that the apparent

difference between White and Black parents with at least one child with a disability is not

significant in the multivariate model. However, it is important to remember that these are self-

reported data, which may underestimate the disability rates among Black children. Results from

the 2005 National Survey of Children with Special Health Care indicate that Black children have

a higher incidence of parental reports of developmental delays but they are less likely than White

youngsters to receive Early Intervention services (McManus, et al., 2014). Thus, it may be that

White parents are more likely to identify their children as disabled because the diagnoses opens

up options for therapeutic treatment. As Colin Ong-Dean argues, as parents “become aware of

9 In this paper, we use the term ‘socioeconomic status’ to refer to the following measures that we show: educational attainment, labor force participation, household income, poverty level, and tenure.

19

accommodations available to a child with a particular diagnosis, privileged parents may be

motivated to use their resources to advocate for such a diagnosis” (2009, p. 65).

Although we expected Black parents to be less likely to have at least one Black adopted

child who is identified as multiracial, the observed differences between White and Black

adoptive parents, with White parents having a multiracial child approximately 7 times as often as

Black parents were a bit surprising. Part of this gulf may be the legacy of hypodescent

characterizing Black Americans with ‘one drop’ of Black ancestry as Black. This approach to

racial identification is so dominant that research indicates between 75 to 90 percent of African

Americans could identify themselves as more than one race, but only a fraction choose to do so

(Lee and Bean, 2010). As Lee and Bean conclude from their interviews with multiracial Black

Americans, “Blacks are less likely to identify multiracially and more likely to identify, and be

identified as Black” (ibid, p. 134). Thus, it may be that Black adoptive parents see themselves as

a monoracial family, even if their children could “technically” be considered of multiracial

descent.

It is interesting that the White intermarried parents are the most likely to report having a

multiracial child. It may be that intermarried adoptive parents have a desire for their adoptive

family to adhere to the ‘as if begotten model,’ of adoption, such that the adopted child can

racially pass as the parents’ would-be biological child (Modell, 1994). So for these families,

there may be more of an incentive on the part of the interracially married adoptive parents to

adopt a child who would theoretically resemble a biological child. Another alternative

explanation is there may be something about being part of an interracial couple that affects how

White parents would report race for their children. For example, research suggests Whites in

interracial partnerships are more likely to take on multiracial identities since, as Dalmage argues,

20

“Once they join an interracial family … the privileges most Whites take for granted become

glaringly visible” (2000, p. 18). Again, due to the limitations of self-reported data, it is

impossible to untangle whether intermarried adoptive parents are indeed the most likely to seek

out a multiracial child to adopt, or if they are just more predisposed to identifying their child as

mixed race.

The multivariate model also confirms our hypothesis that Black parents would be less

likely than White parents to have a foreign-born adopted child. This finding reaffirms previous

research indicating that international adoption is largely supported by White parents and that it is

less accessible to parents of color (Ishizawa, et al., 2006). Indeed, results from the National

Survey of Adoptive Parents show that 92 percent of international adoptive parents are White

(Vandivere, et al., 2009). In contrast, Black parents are more likely to adopt from foster care

(ibid). One reason for this difference may be that adopting internationally is often more costly. In

fact, a recent report compiled by the U.S. Department of State found that the median cost of an

international adoption was over $31,000 (2015B). Given the lower socioeconomic status shown

in the descriptive estimates in Table 1, it is perhaps not surprising that Black parents are less

likely to have a foreign-born child.

Conclusion

Using ACS 5-year data, this paper has taken a closer look at the demographic profile of

Black adoptive parents. This group of adoptive parents is often overlooked as pundits and policy

makers often prefer to focus on the placement of Black children in White homes. There have

been a few small qualitative studies examining Black adoptive families but before the American

Community Survey, few datasets were large enough to examine this group at the national level.

21

Given the volume of the debate on transracial adoption, it may be surprising for readers

to know that there are more Black children adopted by Black parents than White ones. Although

the demographic finding is relatively straight forward, there are important implications because

this statistic will hopefully remind child welfare workers and adoption researchers to recognize

and focus on a sizeable group of adoptive families. Because others cannot easily identify

monoracial Black adoptive families, these families often go unnoticed. Of course, White

monoracial adoptive families are not obvious as well, but since White adoptive parents are

disproportionately represented in the population, they dominate the image of adoptive parents.

Whereas prior research has found that White adoptive parents are more privileged than

White parents raising biological children (Hamilton, et al., 2007), our findings indicate that

Black adoptive parents do not share the same privileged socioeconomic status. In line with

national trends on racial disparities, on average, Black adoptive parents have less access to

human and economic capital. They are less likely to be highly educated, own their homes, or be

in the labor force. They are also more likely to be raising children as single mothers and more

than a quarter (28 percent) of Black adoptive parents live below the poverty line.

These results suggest that on average, Black adoptive parents may not traverse the same

pathway to adoption as many White adoptive parents. Given Black families’ lower average

socioeconomic status, it is likely that fewer of these parents utilized private adoption, which is

much more expensive than public foster care adoption (Vandivere, et al., 2009). From our

results, it is clear that only a miniscule number of Black adoptive parents pursue transnational

private adoption. Although our findings allow us to rule out transnational adoption as a common

pathway to adoptive parenthood for Black parents, the data do not allow us to untangle other

forms of adoptive kinship.

22

These findings raise some important implications for child well-being. Considering that

many child welfare advocates agree that there is benefit to Black children being adopted by

Black parents, it is our hope that these population-based results may help identify potential

demographic profiles from which to recruit Black families. Moreover, our results indicate that

Black adoptive parents could likely benefit from increased social and economic support since

many of these families may be struggling compared to White transracial adoptive parents.

Thus, our conclusions raise more questions than are answered. Whereas the modal family

structure for White transracial adoptive parents is a married household, our findings indicate that

the story is not as straightforward for Black adoptive parents. Forty-four percent of Black

adoptive parents are married, but another 47 percent is comprised of single mothers. Considering

that a large proportion of black adoptive parents report being married more than once, it is

unclear which of these adoptive families are kinship and/or second parent adoptions and which

ones represent the more conventional adoption of a previously unrelated child. These questions

go beyond the scope of the ACS data and mark an important direction for future research.

23

References

Alexander, Leslie B., Leslie Doty Hollingsworth, Martha Morrison Dore, and Janet W. Hoopes (2004). A Family of Trust: African American Parents' Stories of Adoption Disclosure. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 74(4): 448-55.

Amato, Paul, and Jacob Cheadle (2008). Parental Divorce, Marital Conflict and Children's Behavior Problems: A Comparison of Adopted and Biological Children. Social Forces 86(3): 1139-61.

Barn, Ravinder (2013). "Doing the Right Thing': Transracial Adoption in the USA. Ethnic and Racial Studies 86(8): 1139-61.

Bartholet, Elizabeth (2000). Nobody's Children: Abuse and Neglect, Foster Drift, and the Adoption Alternative. Boston: Beacon Press, 2000.

Blackstone, Erwin A., Andrew. J. Buck, Simon Hakim, and Uriel Spiegel (2008). Market Segmentation in Child Adoption. International Review of Law and Economics 28(3): 220-25.

Bobo, Lawrence D., and Camille Z. Charles (2009). Race and the American Mind: From the Moynihan Report to the Obama Candidacy. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 621(1): 243-59.

Bobo, Lawrence D., Camille Z. Charles, Maria Krysan, and Alicia D. Simmons (2012). The Real Record on Racial Attitudes. In Peter V. Mardsen (Ed.), Social Trends in the United States: Evidence from the General Social Survey since 1972, pp. 38-83. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Bonilla-Silva, Eduardo (2004). From Bi-Racial to Tri-Racial: Towards a New System of Racial Stratification in the USA. Ethnic and Racial Studies 27(6): 931-50.Bramlett, Matthew D. (2010). “When Stepparents Adopt: Demographic, Health and Health Care Characteristics of Adopted Children, Stepchildren and Adopted Stepchildren,” Adoption Quarterly. 13:248-267.

Briggs, Laura (2012). Somebody's Children: The Politics of Transracial and Transnational Adoption. Durham: Duke University Press.

Brooks, James, Steven James, and Richard Barth (2002). Preferred Characteristics of Children in Need of Adoption: Is there a demand for available foster children? Social Services Review 76(4): 575-602.

Butler-Sweet, Colleen (2011). ‘A Healthy Black Identity:’ Transracial Adoption, Middle-Class Families, and Racial Socialization. Journal of Comparative Family Studies 42(2): 193-212.

Chandra Anjani, Joyce Abma, Penelope Maza, and Christine Bachrach (1999). Adoption, adoption seeking, and relinquishment for adoption in the United States. Advance data from vital and health statistics; no. 306. Hyattsville, Maryland: National Center for Health Statistics.

Charles, Camille Z. (2003). The Dynamics of Racial Residential Segregation. Annual Review of Sociology 29(1): 167-207.

Dalmage, Heather (2000). Tripping on the Color Line: Black-White Multiracial Families in a Racially Divided World. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.

Davis, F. James (1991). Who Is Black? One Nation's Definition. University Park: Penn State University Press.

Davis, Mary A. (2011). Intercountry Adoption Flows from Africa to the U.S.: A Fifth Wave of Intercountry Adoptions? International Migration Review 45(4): 784-811.

DiTomaso, Nancy, Corrine Post, and Rochelle Parks-Yancy (2007). Workforce Diversity and Inequality: Power, Status, and Numbers. Annual Review of Sociology 33(1): 473-501.

24

Djamba, Yanyi K., and Sitawa R. Kimuna (2014). Are Americans Really in Favor of Interracial Marriage? A Close Look at When They Are Asked About Black-White Marriage for Their Relatives. Journal of Black Studies 45(6): 339-45.

Dorow, Sarah (2006). Transracial Adoption: A Cultural Economy of Race, Gender, and Kinship. New York: New York University Press.

Dubinsky, Karen (2008). The Fantasy of the Global Cabbage Patch: Making Sense of Transnational Adoption. Feminist Theory 9(3): 339-45.

Fenster, Judy (2005). Transracial Adoption in Black and White. Adoption Quarterly 5(4): 33-58.Furstenberg, Frank F. (2007). The Making of the Black Family: Race and Class in Qualitative Studies in

the Twentieth Century. Annual Review of Sociology 33(1): 429-48.Gibson, Priscilla A., Justine N. Christinedaughter, Harold D. Grotevant, and Hee-Kyung Kwon (2005).

The Well-Being of African American Adolescents within Formal and Informal Adoption Arrangements. Adoption Quarterly 9(1): 59-78.

Gillum, Nerissa L. (2011). Review of Research on Black Families Who Formally Adopted Black Children. Families in Society-the Journal of Contemporary Social Services 92(3): 324-28.

Gillum, Nerissa L., and Marion O'Brien (2010). Adoption Satisfaction of Black Adopted Children. Children and Youth Services Review 32(12): 1656-63.

Goldberg, Abbie (2012). Gay Dads: Transitions to Adoptive Fatherhood. New York: New York University Press.

Grow, Lucille J., and Deborah Shapiro (1974).Washington, DC: Child Welfare League of America.Hairston, Creasie F., and Vicki G. Williams (1989). Black Adoptive Parents - How They View Agency

Adoption Practices. Social Casework-Journal of Contemporary Social Work 70(9): 534-38.Hamilton, Laura, Simon Cheng, and Brian Powell (2007). Adoptive Parents, Adaptive Parents:

Evaluating the Importance of Biological Ties for Parental Investment. American Sociological Review 72(1): 95-116.

Harris, David R., and Jeremiah J. Sim (2002). Who Is Multiracial? Assessing the Complexity of Lived Race. American Sociological Review 67(4): 614-27.

Herman, Ellen (2008). Kinship by Design: A History of Adoption in the Modern United States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Hollingsworth, Leslie D. (1997). Effect of Transracial/Transethnic Adoption on Children's Racial and Ethnic Identity and Self-Esteem: A Meta-Analytic Review. Marriage and Family Review 25(1-2): 99-130.

Ishizawa, Hiromi, Catherine T. Kenney, Kazuyo Kubo, and Gillian Stevens (2006). Constructing Interracial Families through Intercountry Adoption. Social Science Quarterly 87(5): 1207-24.

Ishizawa, Hiromi, and Kazuyo Kubo (2014). Factors Affecting Adoption Decisions: Child and Parental Characteristics. Journal of Family Issues 35(5): 627-53.

Jacobson, Cardell K., Leila Nielsen, and Andrea Hardeman (2012). Family Trends and Transracial Adoption in the United States." Adoption Quarterly 15(2): 73-87.

Jacobson, Heather (2008). Culture Keeping: White Mothers, International Adoption, and the Negotiation of Family Difference. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press.

Jennings, Patricia K. (2006). The Trouble with the Multiethnic Placement Act: An Empirical Look at Transracial Adoption. Sociological Perspectives 49(4): 559-581.

Katz, Jennifer, and Emily K. Doyle (2013). Black and White Thinking? Understanding Negative Responses to Transracial Adoptive Families. Adoption Quarterly 16(1): 62-80.

Kennedy, Randall (1994). Orphans of Separatism: The Painful Politics of Transracial Adoption. The American Prospect 17(Apr): 38-45.

25

Khanna, Nikki and Caitlin Killian (2015). “We Didn’t Even Think about Adopting Domestically: The Role of Race and Other Factors in Shaping Parents’ Decisions to Adopt Abroad.” Sociological Perspectives 58(4): 570-94.

Krawiec, Kimberly D (2010). Price and Pretense in the Baby Market, in Michelle Bratcher Goodwin (Ed), Baby Markets: Money and the New Politics of Creating Families, p.p. 41-55. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kreider, Rose M. (2003). Adopted Children and Stepchildren: 2000. Census 2000 Special Reports, CNSR-6RV, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.

Kreider, Rose M., and Philip Cohen (2009). Disability among Internationally Adopted Children in the United States. Pediatrics 124(5): 1311-18.

Kreider, Rose M., and Daphne Lofquist (2014). Adopted Children and Stepchildren: 2010. Current Population Reports, P20-572, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.

Kubo, Kazuyo (2010). Desirable Difference: The Shadow of Racial Stereotypes in Creating Transracial Families through Transnational Adoption. Sociology Compass 4(4): 263-82.

Lee, Jennifer, and Frank Bean (2010). The Diversity Paradox: Immigration and the Color Line in Twenty-First Century America. New York: Russell Sage.

McManus, Beth M., Adam C. Carle, and Mary J. Rapport (2014). Classifying Infants and Toddlers with Developmental Vulnerability: who is most likely to receive early intervention? Child: Care, Health, and Development 40(2): 205-14.

McRoy, Ruth G., Zena Oglesby, and Helen Grape (1997). Achieving Same-Race Adoptive Placements for African American Children: Culturally Sensitive Practice Approaches. Child Welfare 76(1): 85-104.

Modell, Judith (1994). Kinship with Strangers. Berkeley: University of California Press. Moore, Mignon (2011). Invisible Families: Gay Identities, Relationships, and Motherhood among Black

Women. Berkeley: University of California Press.Moosnick, Nora R. (2004). Adopting Maternity. Westport: Praeger. National Association of Black Social Workers (1972): Position Statement on Trans-Racial Adoptions.

New York City.National Center for Education Statistics (2015). The Condition of Education 2015. Institute of Education

Sciences. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.Ong-Dean, Colin (2009). Distinguishing Disability: Parents, Privilege and Special Education. Chicago:

University of Chicago Press. Patton, Sandra (2000). Birthmarks: Transracial Adoption in Contemporary America. New York: New

York University Press.Perry, Samuel L. (2014). Hoping for a Godly (White) Family: How Desire for Religious Heritage

Affects Whites' Attitudes toward Interracial Marriage. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 53(1): 202-18.

Phelan, Jo C., and Bruce G. Link (2015). Is Racism a Fundamental Cause of Inequalities in Health? Annual Review of Sociology 41(1): 311-30.

Prater, Gwendolyn S., and Lula T. King (1988). Experiences of Black Families as Adoptive Parents. Social Work 33(6): 543-45.

Quiroz, Pamela A. (2007). Adoption in a Color Blind Society. New York: Rowman & Littlefield.Raleigh, Elizabeth (2012). Are Same-Sex and Single Adoptive Parents More Likely to Adopt

Transracially? A National Analysis of Race, Family Structure, and the Adoption Marketplace. Sociological Perspectives 55(3): 449-71.

Raleigh, Elizabeth (2016). The Color Line Exception: The Transracial Adoption of Foreign-Born and

26

Biracial Black Children. Women, Gender, and Families of Color, forthcoming. Raleigh, Elizabeth, and Grace Kao (2013). Is There a (Transracial) Adoption Achievement Gap?: A

National Longitudinal Analysis of Adopted Children's Educational Performance. Children and Youth Services Review 35(1): 142-50.

Reardon, Sean F, and Ann Owens (2014). 60 Years after Brown: Trends and Consequences of School Segregation. Annual Review of Sociology 40(1): 199-218.

Rios, Victor (2011). Punished: Policing the Lives of Black and Latino Boys. New York: New York University Press.

Roberts, Dorothy (2002). Shattered Bonds: The Color of Child Welfare. New York: Basic Civitas Books.

Rockquemore, Kerry A., and David L. Brunsma (2007). Beyond Black: Biracial Identity in America. Second Edition. New York: Rowman & Littlefield.

Samuels, Gina M. (2009). "Being Raised by White People”: Navigating Racial Difference among Adopted Multiracial Adults. Journal of Marriage and Family 71(1): 80-94.

Sandven, Kari, and Michael D. Resnick (1990). Informal Adoption among Black Adolescent Mothers. . American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 60(2): 210-24.

Schwartz, Sarah L., and Michael J. Austin (2011). Black Adoption Placement and Research Center at 25: Placing African-American Children in Permanent Homes (1983-2008). Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work 8(1-2): 160-78.

Selman, Peter (2009). The Rise and Fall of Intercountry Adoption in the 21st Century. International Social Work 52(5): 575-94.

Simon, Rita J., and Howard Alstein (1977). Transracial Adoption. New York: John Wiley & Sons. ——— (1994). The Case for Transracial Adoption. Lanham, M.D.: The American University Press.——— (2000). Adoption across Borders: Serving the Children in Transracial and Intercountry

Adoptions. New York: Rowman & Littlefield.——— (2001). Adoption, Race, and Identity. Piscataway, N.J.: Transaction Publishers.Smith, Darron T., Brenda G. Juarez, Cardell K. Jacobson (2011). White on Black: Can White Parents

Teach Black Adoptive Children How to Understand and Cope with Racism. Journal of Black Studies 42(8): 1195-230.

Smith-McKeever, Chedgzsey (2006). Adoption Satisfaction among African-American Families Adopting African-American Children. Children and Youth Services Review 28(7): 825-40.

Smith-McKeever, Chedgzsey, and Ruth G. McRoy (2005). The Role of Private Adoption Agencies in Facilitating African American Adoptions. Families in Society-the Journal of Contemporary Social Services 86(4): 533-40.

Stack, Carol B (1974). All Our Kin: Strategies for Survival in a Black Community. New York: Harper & Row.

Tafoya, Sonya M., Hans Johnson, and Laura E. Hill (2004). "Who Chooses to Choose Two?: Multiracial Identification and Census 2000. New York: Russell Sage Foundation and Population Reference Bureau. www.prb.org, accessed December 2, 2015.

Thomas, Kristy A., and Richard C. Tessler (2007). Bicultural Socialization among Adoptive Families. Journal of Family Issues 28(9): 1189-219.

U.S. Department of State (2015A). Intercountry Adoption Statistics. Bureau of Consular Affairs. http://travel.state.gov/content/adoptionsabroad/en/about-us/statistics.html, accessed December 2, 2015.

U.S. Department of State (2015B). FY 2014 Annual Report on Intercountry Adoption. Washington DC: Bureau of Consular Affairs.

27

http://travel.state.gov/content/dam/aa/pdfs/fy2014_annual_report.pdf, accessed Nov. 5, 2015

Vandivere, Sharon, Karin Malm, and Laura Radel (2009). Adoption USA: A Chartbook Based on the 2007 National Survey of Adoptive Parents. Washington, DC: Department of Health and Human Services. http://aspe.hhs.gov/report/adoption-usa-chartbook-based-2007-national-survey-adoptive-parents, accessed December 2, 2015.

Wang, Wendy (2012). The Rise of Intermarriage: Rates, Characteristics Vary by Race and Gender. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012/02/16/the-rise-of-intermarriage, accessed December 2, 2015.

Ward-Gailey, Christine (2010). Blue-Ribbon Babies and Labors of Love: Race, Class, and Gender in U.S. Adoption Practice. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Warren, Jonathan W., and France W. Twine (1999). White Americans, the New Minority?: Non-Blacks and the Ever-Expanding Boundaries of Whiteness." Journal of Black Studies 28(2): 200-18.

Yancey, George (2003). Who Is White? Latinos, Asians, and the New Black/Nonblack Divide. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

Zhang, Yuanting, and Gary R. Lee (2011). Intercountry Versus Transracial Adoption: Analysis of Adoptive Parents' Motivations and Preferences in Adoption. Journal of Family Issues 32(1): 75-98.

28

Table 1. Characteristics of Adoptive Parents of Black Children1

For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see http://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/tech_docs/accuracy/MultiyearACSAccuracyofData2014.pdf

  White non-Hispanic parent Black alone parentWhite non-Hispanic intermarried parent

 Numbe

rPercen

t

Margin of

error2Numbe

rPercen

t

Margin of

error2Numbe

r Percent

Margin of

error2

Total adoptive parents 69,619 100.0 X115,85

1 100.0 X 7,379 100.0 X

Living arrangement of the parent Married couple households 50,857 73.1 0.92 51,276 44.3 1.03 7,379 100.0 X Male--no spouse present 3,925 5.6 0.53 10,338 8.9 0.61 X X X With an unmarried partner 1,383 2.0 0.32 2,896 2.5 0.34 X X X No unmarried partner present 2,542 3.7 0.44 7,442 6.4 0.52 X X X Female--no spouse present 14,837 21.3 0.93 54,237 46.8 1.03 X X X With an unmarried partner 2,476 3.6 0.53 3,843 3.3 0.37 X X X No unmarried partner present 12,361 17.8 0.82 50,394 43.5 0.99 X X X

Parent has been married more than once3 14,886 23.9 1.07 22,799 27.5 1.09 2,022 27.4 3.46

Educational attainment of the parentLess than high school 2,155 3.1 0.44 12,341 10.7 0.62 244 3.3 1.07High school graduate 10,174 14.6 0.82 29,018 25.0 0.86 977 13.2 2.29Some college 20,556 29.5 1.17 46,046 39.7 0.98 2,665 36.1 3.73Bachelor's degree 19,460 28.0 1.26 16,161 13.9 0.77 1,833 24.8 3.18Graduate or professional school degree 17,274 24.8 1.12 12,285 10.6 0.60 1,660 22.5 3.13

Labor force participation of the parent4 69,619 100.0 X115,79

7 100.0 X 7,379 100.0 XIn labor force 58,120 83.5 0.90 89,821 77.6 0.87 5,967 80.9 3.15

Employed 55,277 79.4 1.01 78,571 67.9 1.03 5,680 77.0 3.35Unemployed 2,843 4.1 0.49 11,250 9.7 0.60 287 3.9 1.64

Not in labor force 11,499 16.5 0.90 25,976 22.4 0.87 1,412 19.1 3.15

Household income5

$0 or less 196 0.3 0.12 2,220 1.9 0.29 1 0.0 0.02$1-$24,999 5,478 7.9 0.73 30,252 26.1 0.97 297 4.0 1.48$25,000-$49,999 10,731 15.4 0.87 30,032 25.9 1.03 1,007 13.6 2.44$50,000-$99,999 24,677 35.4 1.43 31,888 27.5 1.00 2,345 31.8 4.04$100,000-$199,999 22,150 31.8 1.11 17,937 15.5 0.83 2,980 40.4 3.99$200,000 or more 6,387 9.2 0.66 3,522 3.0 0.31 749 10.2 2.32

Below the poverty level 6,333 9.1 0.76 32,421 28.0 0.97 459 6.2 1.86

Tenure Owns with a mortgage 50,124 72.0 1.02 49,832 43.0 1.20 5,222 70.8 4.31Owns free and clear 7,407 10.6 0.77 8,723 7.5 0.51 438 5.9 1.76

Rents home6 12,088 17.4 0.98 57,296 49.5 1.26 1,719 23.3 3.99

RegionNortheast 11,368 16.3 0.83 18,754 16.2 0.72 977 13.2 2.27Midwest 22,757 32.7 1.07 24,532 21.2 0.68 1,579 21.4 3.17South 20,511 29.5 1.02 62,145 53.6 1.08 2,644 35.8 3.63West 14,983 21.5 0.93 10,420 9.0 0.65 2,179 29.5 4.38

Characteristics of Householder's Adopted Children7

Age of youngest child0-5 years 23,100 33.2 1.18 27,746 23.9 1.02 2,411 32.7 3.276-11 years 25,592 36.8 1.23 39,436 34.0 1.00 2,676 36.3 3.4412-17 years 20,927 30.1 1.06 48,669 42.0 0.92 2,292 31.1 3.89

Ratio of adopted girls to adopted boys for the group 0.9 X 0.2 1.1 X 0.2 1.0 X 0.7

29

At least one child identified as multiracial 29,925 43.0 1.15 6,558 5.7 0.47 3,553 48.2 3.96

At least one foreign born child 9,520 13.7 0.75 3,951 3.4 0.34 514 7.0 1.77

At least one child age 5 and over 54,357 100.0 X 99,369 100.0 X 5,787 100.0 X

At least one child with a disability8 7,426 13.7 0.79 11,129 11.2 0.78 846 14.6 3.27

Unweighted total 6,647 X X 7,825 X X 627 X X(X) - not applicable.1 All relationships are collected with reference to the householder, so adoptive parents shown in this table are the householder--someone who owns or rents the home, and has at least one Black alone or in combination adopted child under 18 present in the household.2 This figure, added to, or subtracted from the percent, provides the 90 percent confidence interval. 3 Percentage is shown out of all those who have ever been married.4 The universe for this question is the population aged 16 and over.5 Estimates shown for adjusted household income.6 Rents or occupies without payment. 7 Only the Black alone or in combination adopted children under 18 are included when constructing these estimates.8 Only shown for parents with at least one child aged 5 and over, since some of the disability questions only apply to those aged 5 and over.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2010-2014.

30

Table 2. Comparison of Black Adoptive Parents with White Adoptive Parents1

For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see http://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/tech_docs/accuracy/MultiyearACSAccuracyofData2014.pdf

Model 1Black parent vs. White parent

Estimat

eStandard error

Odds Ratio

Living ArrangementMarried couple (reference)Female, no spouse or partner 0.6637 0.2746 1.94 *Male, no spouse or partner 0.5368 0.5440 1.71

Marital HistoryNever married (reference)Married once -0.3960 0.3368 0.67Married twice or more -0.4167 0.4654 0.66

Educational AttainmentLess than high school 0.5130 0.4820 1.67High school graduate or some college (reference)Bachelors degree -0.7318 0.3244 0.48 *Graduate or professional degree -0.7893 0.2767 0.45 **

Labor Force ParticipationEmployed (reference)Unemployed 0.3467 0.5646 1.41Not in labor force 0.0177 0.3312 1.02

In poverty 0.3301 0.4013 1.39Tenure

Own -0.9723 0.3221 0.38 **Rent (reference)

RegionNortheast (reference)Midwest -0.3932 0.3211 0.67South 0.6836 0.2902 1.98 *West -0.8073 0.4440 0.45

Has at least one multiracial Black adopted child -2.6243 0.3354 0.07 ***

Has at least one foreign born Black adopted child -1.4821 0.3830 0.23 **

*

Has at least one Black adopted child with a disability -0.5187 0.3314 0.60

Has no Black adopted child 5 years old and over -0.6205 0.3221 0.54 Significance is noted as follows: *(<0.05), **(<0.01), ***(<0.001).

31

1 Adoptive parents include only White non-Hispanic, and Black alone householders. White non-Hispanic householders with spouses who are not White non-Hispanic are included with White householders. Black adopted children include those who reported Black alone or in combination with other race groups. Source: American Community Survey, 2010-2014.

32