Hollingsworth L D
School of Social Work, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor 48109-1106, USA.
Soc Work. 1998 Mar;43(2):104-16. doi: 10.1093/sw/43.2.104.
Opponents of policies that protect same-race adoption assert that children of color are languishing in out-of-home care because they are being restricted from entering transracial adoption arrangements. This article argues that transracial adoption is not necessary to ensure that children of color are adopted in a timely manner and sets forth alternative arguments around six issues: (1) policies favoring adoption by foster parents, (2) the availability of same-race families to adopt children of color, (3) the abundance of children in out-of-home care unavailable for adoption or with special needs, (4) disparities in child welfare services related to ethnicity, (5) misleading data on the numbers of children of color who are in foster care, and (6) poverty as an underlying cause of out-of-home placements. This article briefly presents the history of the transracial adoption controversy and discusses its current status; counters assertions typically used to oppose same-race adoption policies for children of color; summarizes the positions of several social work organizations regarding adoption and race; and makes recommendations for education, policy, research, and practice.
反对保护同种族收养政策的人声称，有色人种儿童在家庭外照料中受苦，因为他们被限制进入跨种族收养安排。本文认为，跨种族收养对于确保有色人种儿童及时被收养并非必要，并围绕六个问题提出了替代性观点：（1）有利于养父母收养的政策；（2）有同种族家庭愿意收养有色人种儿童；（3）大量家庭外照料中的儿童无法被收养或有特殊需求；（4）儿童福利服务在种族方面的差异；（5）关于寄养中有色人种儿童数量的误导性数据；（6）贫困是家庭外安置的根本原因。本文简要介绍了跨种族收养争议的历史并讨论了其现状；反驳了通常用于反对为有色人种儿童制定同种族收养政策的观点；总结了几个社会工作组织在收养和种族问题上的立场；并就教育、政策、研究和实践提出了建议。
