You are on page 1of 23

Attitude, Interest, and Motivation for Adoption and Foster Care

Tyzoon Tyebjee This survey compares prospective foster and adoptive parents' attitudes, willingness, and motivations, and discusses implications for media campaigns. The results show that demographic profiles of targets for adoption and foster placements are the same, an opportunity exists to shape positive attitudes toward foster care in immigrant populations, the most compelling way to attract parents is to focus on the child in need, and testimonials of personal experiences of foster and adoptive parents should address perceived barriers to adopting or fostering. Political, religious, and environmental ideology were unrelated to attitudes or willingness to adopt or foster. Respondents with strong identifications with gay or lesbian lifestyles exhibited a higher than average willingness to adopt or foster.

Tyzoon Tyebjee, PhD, is Professor of Marketing, Leavey School of Business, Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, CA. The author conducted this research under the auspices of the Community Task Force on Homes for Children, which consists of representatives from the Departments of Family and Children's Services in five Bay Area counties and California. The David & Lucile Packard Foundation funded the study.

0009-4021/2003/060685-22 $3.00 2003 Child Welfare League of America

685

686

CHILD WELFARE VoL LXXXII, #6 November/December

his article reports on the public's attitudes toward foster care and adoption. Only by understanding the needs of the lay public can service agencies can develop media campaigns and program services that more effectively recruit and retain adoptive and foster parents. Attitudes toward adoption and foster care are changing. Hoksbergen (1998) identified three shifts in the motivations that lead to adopting a child. Before 1970, the motivation was to search for a substitute child, and consequently, adoptions were primarily domestic, and prospective adoptive parents sought same-race children. From 1970 to 1985, the focus of adoptive parents was more idealistic, driven by the desire to provide for a child in need, which resulted in a dramatic rise in foreign adoptions. Since 1985, a new realism has surfaced with a rising awareness that foreign adoptions can entail having to deal with children with health problems or difficulties in adjusting to their new envirorunent. This is reinforced by the nature of journalistic coverage of adoption. A content analysis of this coverage in national print and broadcast media shows that most stories address policy issues rather than provide positive narratives with a human face (Waggenspack, 1998). Several researchers have contended that myths and misperceptions have stigmatized the status of adoptive families, thereby influencing not only the public but also policymakers, court officials, child welfare professionals, and adoption researchers (Crawford, J., 1999; Miall, 1987; Wegar, 2000). Much of the published literature on attitudes toward adoption has focused on either specific populations or specific adoption practices. Favorable attitudes toward open adoption among both adoptive and birthparents were reported by Haugaard, West, and Moed (2000) and among a random sample in the Canadian (Miall, 1996) and U.S. populations (Rompf, 1993). HoUingsworth (2000a) reported on the sociodemographic correlates of attitude toward transracial adoption. Bausch and Serpe (1999) found that 38% of 591 Mexican American respondents said they were likely

Tyzoon Tyebjee

687

to adopt but thought that structural obstacles such as lack of information, resources, and bilingual social workers made it difficult. Beeman and Boisen (1999) found attitudes of child welfare professionals toward kinship foster care to be generally favorable, although workers perceive kinship caregivers as more difficult to supervise. I. Crawford, McLeod, Zamboni, and Jordan (1999) evaluated the attitudes of psychologists toward adoption by gay and lesbian parenting and reported a bias against placing female children in such situations. As this review demor\strates, published literature on attitudes toward adoption and foster care is skewed toward adoption. Limited understanding of attitudes among the general population, which is ultimately the source of adoptive and foster parents, exists.* No study has compared attitudes toward adoption versus foster care. Although the child welfare and family studies literature include few, if any, attitude surveys of the general population, several such surveys have appeared as research reports to foundations and agencies funding such studies. The Field Research Institute (1999) found that only 44% of Califomians believe children in California are more at risk of parent abuse today than 10 years ago, 17% believe children are less at risk, and 32% believe the level of risk has remained the same. This belies the past decade's sharp increase in the number of children in need of homes. Moreover, of the 17% who believe the level of risk has declined, more Hispanics (25%) and African Americans (27%) than whites (13%) believe children are less at risk. Again, this belies the fact that a disproportionate number of children in need of homes are Hispanic and African American. Clearly, in California, the public perception of the extent of children's risk significantly lags behind reality. Princeton Survey Research Associates (1997) conducted a nationwide survey of 1,554 households in behalf of the Evanson B. Donaldson Adoption Institute. Its key findings were the following:
* For an analysis of sociodemographic correlates of adoptive versus nonadoptive parents, see HoUingsworth (2000b) and Poston and Cullen (1989).

688

CHILD WELFARE Vol. LXXXII, #6 November/December

Although 90% of Americans have a positive view of adoption, half say that adopting is not as good as having one's own child. Attitudes toward adoption are divided across social groups. Less-educated Americans are more skeptical about adoption, men are more skeptical than women, and African Americans are more skeptical than whites. Six in 10 Americans have had personal experience with adoption, meaning they themselves, a family member, or a close friend was adopted, adopted a child, or put a child up for adoption. A third have considered adopting a child. Those with personal experience are more likely than those without to have favorable opinions of adoption. Americans are divided over whether it is better for pregnant teenagers to place their babies for adoption or raise them themselves. Americans also are divided over which option is better for the child in this situation, although slightly more believe the baby is better off adopted than raised by the birthmother. Americans are divided over whether the government should promote adoption as an alternative to welfare. Asked about a California plan in which welfare mothers would be encouraged to put their children up for adoption, a slim majority opposed the plan. When asked whether the plan should apply to pregnant teenagers, respondents were somewhat more supportive. The public is ambivalent about open adoption, that is, adoption in which birthparents maintain some contact with the child they have placed for adoption. Most Americans think it is a good idea, but only in a limited number of cases. One in five feel it is always a bad idea for birthmothers to maintain contact with the children they have placed for adoption. The National Foster Care Awareness Project (1998) conducted a nationwide survey of 1,000 households. Respondents viewed foster care favorably (74%), although not as highly as adoption.

Tyzoon Tyebjee

689

Also, 19% of the respondents indicated a willingness to become a foster parent, although differences across social groups existed. People yoimger than 30 were more likely to become foster parents (33%), as were single people (30%), young women (29%) and Hispanics (28%). A relatively large number (41%) of respondents said they knew someone who was or had been a foster parent, and these respondents were twice as likely to be willing to be a foster parent as the general population. No study has investigated both foster care and adoption. Thus, comparisons between foster care and adoption with the same set of respondents have been not been possible. This study was motivated by the importance of examining differing views of and interest in becoming adoptive parents versus foster parents in the same set of respondents. Such a comparison is useful in determining whether agencies could use the same media campaign in promoting both foster care and adoption. If the target audience and the media message implications of attitudes and motivations are the same for foster care and adoption, agencies could leverage scarce resources in a single campaign. On the other hand, if the demographics and attitudes of those who are willing to foster are different from those willing to adopt, media campaigns would need to be targeted to different audiences. This study looks at what core motivations form the common ground between those who are willing to adopt and those who are willing to foster a child in need. In particular, the study addresses the following questions: What factors influence attitudes toward adoption versus attitudes toward foster care? What factors influence the willingness to adopt versus the willingness to foster? What motivates people to adopt or foster, and what factors influence these motivations? The Field Research Institute administered the survey as part of its periodic public opinion polls. It admirustered the random digit dialing telephone survey in fall 2000 to 1,011 California

690

CHILD WELFARE Vol. LXXXII, #6 November/December

households with respondents older than 18. The institute embedded the questions regarding attitudes, willingness, and motivation regarding foster care and adoption in one of its regular syndicated surveys. The syndicated survey instrument includes a long battery of demographic and ideology variables. Table 1 shows the profile of the sample on these demographic and ideology variables. Attitudes Toward Adoption Versus Foster Care The study measured attitudes toward adoption with the question, "Is your impression of adoption generally positive or negative?" Of respondents, 91% reported a positive attitude, 5% had a negative attitude, and 4% had no opinion. The survey asked a similar question asked about foster care and found a positive attitude expressed by only 60% of the respondents; 26% reported a negative attitude. Next, the study addressed how segments of the population view adoption and foster care. The analysis cross-tabulated the two attitude measures against the battery of demographic and ideology variables (see Tables 1 and 2). The tables also report p values for the chi-square test for each demographic breakdown. The variables associated (using a cut-off of p < .01) with attitude toward adoption are: Ethnicity. Whites were more positive about adoption, and African Americans and Hispanics were significantly less positive. Home Ownership. Homeowners were more positive than renters. Household Size. Respondents in large households were less positive about adoption. Language of Interview. Respondents interviewed in English were more positive. Citizenship. U.S. citizens were more positive. Place of Birth. U.S.-born respondents were more positive.

Tyzoon Tyebjee

691

Voter Registration. Respondents who were registered to vote were more positive. Personal Experience. People who had themselves or knew someone who had been an adoptive or foster parent, were more positive. The variables associated (using a cut-off of p < .01) with attitude toward foster care are: Age. Young people ages 18 to 24 have the most favorable view of foster care, and youth ages 25 to 29 are the next most supportive group. Language of Interview. Respondents for whom the interview was in Spanish were less likely to be positive about foster care and more likely to have no opinion than were respondents in interviews conducted in English. Citizenship. Respondents who were not U.S. citizens were less likely to be positive about foster care and more likely to have no opinion toward it. Place of Birth. Foreign-born citizens were more likely to have no opinion on the topic, leading to less frequent positive or negative reports. Assuming that being foreign-born is associated with a lower likelihood of being a registered voter, the effect of voter registration is consistent with place of birth, although at a weaker level of significance. Familiarity with Adoption and Foster Care Issue. Familiarity was associated with more positive responses and fewer no opinion responses. Personal Experience. People who had themselves or knew someone who had been an adoptive or foster parent were more positive about foster care and less likely to have no opinion about foster care. Comparing the correlates of attitude toward adoption with the correlates with attitude toward foster care, the results can lead to some interesting observations. First, nonwhite, ethnic populations and people who are immigrants are less likely to have favorable views of adoption. Therefore, media campaigns about

692

CHILD WELFARE Vol. LXXXII, #6 November/December

8
O

1-; 00 h- O) C\J C OJ O C CO C c\i ^ O O iri r^

CO Tf

1CO

(D c\i

CO CO

C\l

Tf

CO Ti^

CO in

CO CO

CO CO

N cd

N Ol O) O) N CO IT) c\i CO i n CO cvi

O> CD

h^ CO

CO
T-^

CO CO

in * C in q O c\i 00 c\i C o O

q o

CM

o>

r^

1-

h-

1-

T-

o> in - oj c\j oj C r^ CO 1-^ CO CD O o> CO CO Ol a> O)

a. o

Ln S

h* C o j O c\j o TT 1 c j

r^ Ol o C -^ M

^ in

CO CO CO CM CD CM CD in CO CO 1- 1-

ss

f-

C O

h.; en 05 i n CJ

O> CO CO CO Tt CO

d ai

05 d

't

C <O D

CD TJ- cd iri CM OJ

T3 C

tic

(1)

C ffi 3 O

^
UJ

O
0}

-J

1
u

QJ

O C
c Q)
^> _'

o o
O5 05 en O5 CSJ csi CO ^ in
_ rv I CO * '^- CJ rr\ v^ Iir> n

< I
I- W

Fe Ma

a .c

If
E = o o w o

I
S

cI5 C
C3

J S E ffi ^ I? < 0)
Z

o .< g S ~ I < < Z

^ 5

Tyzoon Tyebjee

693

m o

in in C 00 oq in O
CO d
cvi

o
CO

in
>

00

<D

O>

CM

CO cvi

in CO
00 CO

t>-

CM

1^ in CO o

in

oo

CJ V

cn

CO 00

00 CO

cn

CO

fN.

h--

CO

1-

co T-^ cvi cvi iri

cvi oq 1 - o i 1 - C O 1^ cj) iri cji r^ iri CO 00 O) CO O) O)

00

Oi

h*

CVI

OJ

t^ C O

oJ od 00 C i n 00 O O) r^ 00 O) C 00 O

cvi d
O> O)

in 1^ O) in N; cvi (b cy r^ C3
O) CO O> GO O)

h^ CD CO O) ^ ^ O Cy Tf O
'^
CVJ CVJ T -

O CVI
T-

Tf O>

00 CO

CO O

CO ^

t^

<CO

t-

in

-r-

C * O C I in V * in

o CO in

r^ r^

CO ^ ^

CJ V h^

Tt CVI

CVj

CVI T CVI

T1-

TT-

CO ^

^ o c\i lo o ^
^ CJ

o
^

in

CO CO in

o cd d

in

r^

n in
00 in

00

CJ V
CO CO

00

G)

CO

00

C\J

c d

3 .9
g:

II
8?
CD CD >

CE O

E C o <ii O z

S z 03 3

694

CHILD WELFARE Vol. LXXXII, #6 November/December

a>
05
CO

o o

CO

O> CM CO cd

q q
't in

CO ^

CC>

CO

q
in

CVJ CO O

CM

CD C O

ro d

in C O C d O

in C O

CVJ

CO
r>-'

txi

in
CO

CO

T-

in

m o 1- o

in e n
CM C\j ro CO

5 ro

in in c j Tt ro C O

CO r^ C Cvi M

ro ro

i n CO C c6 M

ro

CO

d ro ro
<f

CO

CO CD T-

O I-- l O CO r^ CO eg CO 1 -

CO

ro ro
in

CO

ro

CO i n CO

Cvl

I
o

C O S

h~ q h.- in C cji cd r>^ D


^ CN CO tCO

ro cvj

C co M CO f - CJ

ram

C O

C O

mi

C O
5 o
_O 0) C Q. O
CO Q

C D

o
CO

Hava at Leasti Forei gn-Born 1

<u .2 Q.

lU

ffl

if

c; cu

i II . 1
'I

Ragis tarad to V

c
| o

g O

| o

^ z

Consiervativa Midd la-of-the-

Yes No/n oncitizen

Tyzoon Tyebjee

695

CO CO

iri in

C CO M C O

CO

cvi

CO CO

C O

00 CO in

C CO M

co i n cd

cvi cvi cd

cd

CM

CM CO

'T^

o> cvi

CO in

CVI

r-

C 00 C ] M V
<t

C O

CO

iri

iri

C M C in O

in

(d

CO

CM O)

CO CO

CO O) cn

oo

CO CJ cn in 00 05

OJ

T-

in

OJ

co d)
O) CJ)

OJ ^

h^ o C O cvi ^ C O OJ O) 00

CO
CVJ

00 00

CO

in C O

C C0 O 3 CJ) C CO O

CO O) in OJ CVI o (O

co

CO CM in
CM

C30 CVI

CO CO CO

CM

CO O)

in

C 00 M

cvi cd
C M

CO CO CO CO

o cd

CO in 1-^

0; OC)

V oo CM C J

i^

y-

CJ V

CO CO

od

C CO M

d cd

cd cd 1^
C CJ O V

cn q ^ oi oi CO
CJ

CO

religious/n0 preferenc hri:stian vith hri:stian/ident reli gious right Christian (inciu ding J ewish) efLised to an!

1
ink of Self as

immun

CQ

C O X3 V.

8
ous Prafai ral t know

Ibxp n

>.
a

fication wi

a >

efii ther respo nses

.2

o c

O
II
CC

c S
O

.o Q '3 o

!2 .
t

o S
^ ^

z o

IE

<

ntfi

0) C

c o

Q.

oil

696

CHILD WELFARE Vol. LXXXII, #6 November/December

I
1 1 I
33. 39.
CO

m cd

CO

CO

cd

CO

^ CO

CO CO

T.-

CO

o r^ ^-.

ro

q q Ol C q in q O r^ 1-^ cJ -^ oi -^r C D
in CD CO ^1- CO i n ' I '

CO

CSJ 1 ^

CD

in

m in C D

CO s . C h.; r^ q O CO C C cd cd d O O m i n m C ^f m O

37. 33.

CO CM

CO

Tt

CO CO in C O

en
CO

tn

40. 36.

eg

ro tn

CO

1^ Tt CO

CO cvj

in q in C q 05 O in en C en d d O
CO CO CO CVI * Tt

TJ

2 a. o
(0 3
CO

184 158

151 105

254 220

CO CO

in

197 164

ro in

CD CD

ro
CO

1^ CJ

tn CM
CM

314

034

001

CO CO

I
in

I
I
,0
O> CO i n CO

CO

'cr

C O CD CO i n CO

CO

o
CM

eg
CO

o ro
ro
CO

11.

o
0) 0)

T1-

in in in C C O O hCM CO CM CM CM CM

15

o o> T^ cd C iri O

CD CM

O5 i n

O5

CD CO

in in o cd cd N iri

cd cd -^ * cd ' t
CM CM CM CM

I
Q. D C
CD

u c

CM O

C M C M Ol ^ O Ol

CD N h^ CO

CD CO

Ol O Ol C O C in in in O

Tt

r>- CO CJ)

CVl

-^ i n cj cd cd
CO i n r^ m Tt

C C in m in in in O O

126 106

I- o

in in (0

CO 1 ^ Tt O CM eg

CO

* CJ

eg CO
CD CO

in in

CM CO

u)

o
(0

jr less 3/trade sch100l Soma col College g rad uate Postoradi ! Studies

163 154

18-24 25-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-64 65 and older

I
Female Male ga

i5 c !2 c CO a. o c c

ducation

C M

o ca o

I
01 CD

O5

.a i a. o 5 .2 = E o .2 i5 C = O = z X m< z 2

Tyzoon Tyebjee

697

10.

cvi cd ' - ^

cvi od

o d

12.

h-

r-.

r-:

C * O

cn

cn in C q O cd cn 1^ d

C 00 O -^ in

00

CO CO

o m 00 oo

CO CM

O)
00

c n o d

58. 42. 50. 40.

54.

CD CD i n in CD ^ in i n CD CD

o o o> o >

CO in

O)

sS

CO CM c n OO CO CO

CO

cd cvi

in in

33 47

CM CO

ro

m o o

O
in CVI

CO

oo

" CO ^

o
o

in

.- CO 1^ CO

243 212

237

305

385

CO m C o O

1 - in 1 - CO ^ CO ^ m

in o * CJ C J in CJ T- m V

o
CO

in y- CM in .- C M

.144

.522

.762

.229

14. 16. 10.

in Tt

c d

13. 10. 17.

C C 1 O CVI q M 3 CD r^ O) CD ^

^ OJ

CM CM

y-

<D

y-

C I O) V

c CO n c c d d

CJ V

CO O

C I in V
*

.934

c d

^ t-

1-

in CO

CM CM CM CM

CO c d CM CM CM CM CO

m o d

CD CM CM

in

00 in CI V

CO CM CM

o i

c c d d
CM CM

.-

0> 00 O

CO in C cn r^ -.r M 00 O> C 00 CO O O m in CO m m r~

CO O) in

CO CD in in CO

r CJ) oi O J
n in

r*1^

h- CO 00 o TO C ^ O C M M C C t - T- 1 M M

CO r- <O CO ' ^ T~ O) CO in

oo C O

O C CO C O O ^ CO r^ T- r^ 1 n CM

246
l~ -

933

698

CHILD WELFARE Vol. LXXXII, #6 November/December

CO CO

m o

C M
Tt

CO

I It

C r.. ro r^ M d CO c6 N^

O)

CO Tt

Tt CO

CVJ

Tt

CO

cd cd

ej

en
05

CO

T-

CO

Tt C M

tn CO
Tt Tt

m in

tn tn

ro cd
ID

CO Tf

CO eg

in

cd lO

Tt

CO C3 in

C ro o in O CO in in CO CO eo CO
CO

35.8 44.0

33.9 41.7

tn
CO

?
CO CO

fe
141 330 383

103 214 104

388

254

Tf

CO

j^

.087

.001

.001

.001

.493

.013

304 168

I
Ul

17.8 12.5 11.9 16.2

12.3 24.8

22.7

25.7 11.9

1.7 8.4

2.0 8.9

I I I

CJ V

CO

CO

CO

d cd

eg evi C J CO V

cd

Tt

eg C M

C CJ M V

ro cd

CO CO C C M M

ro

in

t^ C O C CVI M

Tt

CO in CJ C M

CO Tt

O
CO IO

CO CO

O5 CO

CO

C M

C ro r~ m O CO CD C CO M

CO CO

ro CJ

ro CO ro CO m T-

UJ
c

o C O
x;
CO

(])

C O tD

Res pondent iople people 2 people

Lang uage of i

ast

:=

.2 c;
lish nish

CM
UJ

Size

ffl

m o a

'o

CVI CO

T tn

C35

CO

ign

I
z >

a1
ta 00

TD

C Q LU CO

1 1S o3
z f^

.CO

u I s

& S

C35

1 5 9 i . 1
o z S o 5 o o 5

9.8 4.3
T-

.110
O
TD
CO

137 184
O tD tD

ro

Tt

38.0 37.5

Tyzoon Tyebjee

699

cn

^co
oo

o
O C

o
3 J

q
C

M C

^
O

^. "^
O>00

^ ^ ^
C310OCO

^.
OJ

od oi

50. 56.

56.

o o>

in cd * cd C m O

1^ m

CO Ol

in

CO 00 id cd in m

m
in id in

C in O

C O

cd d CO m

od

cd

CO CO

5.6
CO
CVI

LO

00

CM

in T-

in

CO T-

CO CM

oJ .001

T3

15.

13.

16. 21.

20. 12.

m (^

oo

00

cd

CO cn

cd cvi

q cd oi

CVI

cn

CO

in

C M

o
T.:

in

d
CM

C M

y-

C CO

oo OO
id C C M M

CO CVI C O

y-

od

y-l

C C M M

oi cd

CJ C V M

cvi cd cd CO C CJ M

oi C M

C M C M CJ V

^-

CO

C N. O

CVI

od cd

C CVI M

cn

C C M M

CO

oi a-

o
CO C O

cvi C O

OJ C O in in CO

CO

y-

C M

in CO d CO

o CO oi cvi in C O

o> od
in

id in

C O

CO

y-

h- CO
CVJ ..-

cvi

1 CO

CO CO

CO CO CO CO

cn

CM OJ

00 ^

C M

m o CO

in CO C M

r CO 1 - CO CO CVI CO

C oo M O in

!a c' !a

C A

al,
3 X <D U)

Iran o n o CD II
5

3.2 4.2

ter
C O

e/a
C O

3
II

Ion.
o u

o LL
j j

ID
D

C C D O)

a>

C/J

>i

d o
z

700

CHILD WELFARE Vol. LXXXII, #6 November/December

adoption targeted to nonwhite audiences must address established adverse attitudes. The immigrant population, on the other hand, has a less formed opinion about foster care, as reflected in the rate of no opinion responses. Thus, media campaigns about foster care targeting immigrant populations can be directed toward attitude formation rather than attitude change. Second, the effect of the respondent's education is related to attitudes toward both adoption and foster care, but in completely different ways. In the case of adoption, the more educated segment of the population has a favorable view, but in the case of foster care, the less educated segment has a positive attitude. Third, people who demonstrated the highest level of concern about problems facing children had the most negative view of foster care. One conjecture that can be derived from this relationship is that giving a child only a temporary home is really not in the child's best interests. Finally, a powerful determinant of positive attitudes toward adoption and foster care is the respondent's own experience with those in his or her social network. If the respondent knew someone who was an adoptive or foster parent, he or she had an increased favorable attitude. This result suggests significant opportunities for the use of adoptive and foster parents as spokespersons in media campaigns and peer-to-peer communications. Willingness to Adopt Versus Provide Foster Care The question, "How likely is it that you yourself would seriously consider providing either a temporary home to a child as a foster parent or a permanent home to a child as adoptive parent at some point in your life?" measured willingness to be an adoptive or foster parent. The respondent could answer at one of four levels of willingness, and the distribution of responses across the sample was: very likely, 15%; somewhat likely, 32%; not too likely, 23%; not at all likely, 29%; and no opinion, 1%. The survey asked the 47% (n = 475) of respondents who indicated a willingness level of either very likely or somewhat likely

Tyzoon Tyebjee

701

whether they would be more likely to adopt or foster. Of these 475 respondents, 55% indicated a preference for permanent adoption, 36% preferred providing a temporary foster home, and the remaining 9% were unsure. The research objective was to identify the differences in the characteristics of those who were likely to prefer to volunteer as adoptive parents versus foster parents. Table 2 compares these preferences across various demographic and ideological characteristics. The only statistically significant difference between those who were willing or somewhat willing to adopt versus foster was in their stated degree of concern for children. Those who were extremely concerned about children were more likely to adopt than foster. Those who were somewhat concerned about children split virtually equally between preferring to adopt and preferring to foster. This result is striking because it suggests that individuals who are inclined to become foster parents are similar to those who are inclined to adopt a child, at least in terms of the demographic characteristics included in this survey. Motivations for Adopting or Providing Foster Care The study asked the subset of respondents who said they were very or somewhat likely to adopt or foster the reason behind their proclivity. Interviewers read several statements to them and asked respondents whether the reason given in each statement applied in their case. Table 3 shows the results. The most salient reasons for a person's willingness to adopt or foster are all focused on the child, namely, to make a difference in a child's life, to provide a child with a positive family experience, or because there are so many children in need. The second most common set of motivations focused on how adoption or fostering would affect the adult, namely adding meaning to life, fulfilling religious or spiritual beliefs about providing for children, or becoming a parent or continuing to be a parent. The least cited motivations were environmental factors, namely, having adequate financial resources or not being able to bear children.

702

CHILD WELFARE Vol. LXXXII, #6 November/December

TABLE 3
Motivations for Adopting or Becoming a Foster Care Parent for Those Respondents Likeiy to Consider (n = 496) (in percentages) Definitely Applies 77.9 75.5 73.9 57.2 57.1 53.1 37.6 17.3 Somewhat Applies 16.0 16.3 18.2 29.0 25.3 26.3 31.8 7.6 Does Not Apply 6.1 8.2 7.9 13.7 17.5 20.5 30.6 75.1

Motivation Make a difference in a child's life Would like to provide a child with a positive family experience There are so many children in need Add meaning to your life Religious/spiritual beliefs about providing for children Would like to become a parent or to continue parenting Have the financial resources to adequately care for a child Are unable to have children of your own

Note: The interviewers read these statements in randomized order across respondents. For reporting purposes, this article ranks them in terms of salience.

The study asked respondents to evaluate factors that often prevent people from becoming foster or adoptive parents. Respondents rated to what extent each of these factors applied to them. As in the question of motivation, respondents made no distinction between barriers in the case of foster care versus adoption. The study investigated motives to adopt or foster only in the case of respondents who indicated some level of willingness to either be foster or adoptive parents, however, it investigated barriers for the entire sample. Table 4 shows the distribution of responses. Whereas the most compelling motives for adopting or fostering were focused outward on the needs of the child, the strongest barriers lay in respondents' life situations. These barriers were due to the respondents' life cycle stage, namely, their age and family size. The next most important barriers were the respondent's resource constraints, in terms of finances, time, and space. The third layer of barriers lay in how people felt about dealing with public agencies and the fear of losing the child to the claims of the birthparents.

Tyzoon Tyebjee

703

TABLE 4 Barriers to Adopting or Becominc1 a Foster Parent (in percentages) Definitely Appiies 41.5 39.5 28.9 28.2 27.9 27.0 18.6 17.9 17.0 Somewhat Appiies 16.3 19.9 24.9 22.4 16.9 23.2 30.1 25.9 33.3 Does Not Appiy 42.2 40.6 46.1 49.3 55.2 49.8 51.3 56.2 49.7

Barrier

Already have children/ family is big enough Too young or too old Job/career limitations on available time Inadequate financial resources Inadequate room in home Possibility of having to return child to birthparents Hassle of dealing with public agencies Effect that child might have on family members Uncertainties about chiid's heaith or temperament

Note: The order in which these statements were! read was randomized1 across respondents. For reporting purposes, they have been ranked In terms of salience.

The Effect of Ideology


The Field Research Institute survey methodology asked respondents their opinions in four areas of ideology: identification with the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender (GLBT) community; religious affiliation; identification with the environmental movement; and placement on the conservative-liberal political spectrum. As Tables 1 and 2 show, respondents' ideological positions in these areas were not significantly associated with their attitudes toward adoption or foster care or their preferences for one over the other. If one ignores the stringent test of statistical significance, in absolute terms, the attitude toward foster care was less positive in the case of Hberals, those without religious affiliation, and those who strongly identify with the GLBT community. The effect of ideology on the willingness to adopt or foster a child provided an interesting result. As indicated, 15% of the overall sample indicated they were very likely to adopt or foster a child. Although political, religious, or environmental ideology

704

CHILD WELFARE Vol. LXXXII, #6 November/December

do not significantly influence this overall willingness, GLBT identity is a strong influence. Of those who strongly identify with the GLBT community, 26.4% said they were very likely to adopt or foster a child. The preference data (see Table 2) also indicated that this segment of the population was more inclined toward adoption than foster care.

Conclusions
Based on the public opinion poll of California households, the study found that the public's attitude toward adoption is overwhelmingly positive. More than 90% of the respondents had a favorable view of adoption. The attitude toward foster care was more moderated. Only 60% of the respondents held a favorable view of foster care. This pattern repeated itself when it comes to willingness to take a child into the home; 55% would prefer to take in a child through adoption, whereas 36% would prefer to do so as foster parents. In examining the demographic correlates of attitudes toward adoption versus foster care respectively, the study found that they are virtually identical. In both cases, the following are associated with a more favorable attitude toward both adoption and foster care: being white, being U.S. born, holding U.S. citizenship, being a registered voter, and speaking English. A significant finding is that people who preferred to speak Spanish, were not U.S. citizens, and were foreign born, which are all possible correlates of being a recent immigrant, have less definitively formed attitudes toward foster care, as represented by a relatively higher incidence of no opinion responses. This represents an opportunity for media campaigns directed toward the immigrant community to shape a positive view of foster care. A second significant finding is that people who personally know someone who has fostered or adopted a child are likely to have a more positive view of both adoption and foster care. This suggests the use of testimonials in recruiting adoptive and foster

Tyzoon Tyebjee

705

parents in media campaigns. On the other hand, political ideology, religious affiliation, environmentalism, and identification with GLBT sexual orientation are statistically unrelated to attitudes toward adoption and foster care. Consequently, ideological subtext is unlikely to be effective messaging in media campaigns. With respect to stated willingness to adopt versus foster, the study found no demographic correlates of the preference for one over the other. Once again, the target audiences for adoption and fostering seem to overlap. This is good news for public interest media campaigns, which do not need to worry about splitting precious media budgets across separate campaigns for adopting and fostering. The most compelling factors that motivate people to adopt or foster are the plight of children in society and, less so, their own needs for personal fulfillment. Media messages that focus on children in need, therefore, will be the most compelling. Yet, the desire to help children is moderated by the realities of whether the people see themselves as too young or too old, whether they feel their families are already too large, or whether they will have the time, money, or space to accommodate another child. Clearly, the study finds, people have a generally positive attitude toward and willingness to adopt or foster. Testimonials of people in different Ufe cycles and economic circumstances who have had positive personal experiences with adopting or fostering could be influential in persuading people to translate this positive attitude into action.^

References
Bausch, R. S., & Serpe, R. T. (1999). Recruiting Mexican American parents. Child Welfare, 78, 693-716. Beeman, S., & Boisen, L. (1999). Child welfare professionals' attitudes toward kinship foster care. Child Welfare, 78, 315-337. Crawford, I., McLeod, A., Zamboni, B. D., & Jordan, M. B. (1999). Psychologists' attitudes toward gay and lesbian parenting. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 30, 394^01.

706

CHILD WELFARE Vol. LXXXII, #6 November/December

Crawford, J. M. (1999). Co-parent adoptions by same sex couples: From loophole to Law. Families in Society, 80,271-278. Field Research Institute. (1999). Child abuse and neglect poll. San Francisco: Author. Haugaard, J. J., West, N. M., & Moed, A. M. (2000). Open adoptions: Attitudes and experience. Adoption Quarterly, 4,89-99. Hoksbergen, R. A. C. (1998). Changes in motivation for adoption, value orientations and behavior in three generations of adoptive parents. Adoption Quarterly, 2,37-55. HoUingsworth, L. (2000a). Sociodemographic influences in the prediction of attitudes toward transracial adoption. Families in Society, 81,92-100. HoUingsworth, L. (2000b). Who seeks to adopt a child? Findings from the National Survey of Family Growth. Adoption Quarterly, 3,1-24. Miall, C. E. (1987). The stigma of adoptive parent status: Perceptions of community attitudes toward adoption and the experience of informal social sanctioning. Family Relations: Interdisciplinary journal of Applied Family Studies, 36,34-39.

MiaU, C. E. (1996). The social construction of adoption: Clinical and community perspectives. Family Relations: Interdisciplinary Journal of Applied Family Studies, 45,309-317.

National Foster Care Awareness Project. (1998). Foster care in America. Washington, DC: Greenberg Quinlan Research. Poston, D. L., & CuUen, R. M. (1989). Propensity of white women in the United States to adopt. Social Biology, 36,167-185. Princeton Survey Research Associates. (1997). Benchmark adoption survey. Princeton, NJ: Author. Rompf, E. L. (1993). Open adoption: What does the average person think. Child Welfare, 71, 219-230. Waggenspack, B. M. (1998). The symbolic crises of adoption: Popular media's agenda setting. Adoption Quarterly, 1,57-82. Wegar, K. (2000). Adoption, family ideology, and social stigma: Bias in community attitudes, adoption research, and practice. Family Relations: Interdisciplinary Journal of Applied Family Studies, 49, 363-370. (Address requests for a reprint to Tyzoon Tyebjee, Leavey School of Business, Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, CA 95055.)

You might also like