Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.1353/ado.2023.a907128
Alice Diver, Emily Hipchen
abstract: In this conversation, Emily Hipchen speaks with Dr. Alice Diver (School of Law, QUB, N. Ireland) about some of the themes underpinning her publication, "'Monstrous Othering': The Gothic Nature of Origin-Tracing in Law and Literature" (November 2021). The conversation opens with a brief discussion of their own respective experiences as "mother and baby home" adoptees in the US and Canada in the 1960s before turning to an analysis of how the particular adoptee brand of "fearful otherness" is often represented—and indeed perpetuated—in certain works of "monstrous orphan" fiction. In respect of achieving meaningful sociolegal and cultural reforms, language is key. The debates surrounding the wording of Ireland's controversial Birth Information and Tracing Act (2022) highlighted how lingering prejudices still attach to the topic of adoption and to the need to find one's origins. Discriminatory barriers to access—and contact with genetic relatives—still exist: the use of labels matters, too, as the controversy over the use of the term "birth mother" within the legislation (since amended to "mother") also evidenced. Though mainly relevant to adoptee rights, and adoption law and policy, debates and discourse on language may also impact on other areas where losses of origins occur, such as surrogacy and international adoption.
{"title":"Law and Adoption in the UK: A Conversation with Alice Diver","authors":"Alice Diver, Emily Hipchen","doi":"10.1353/ado.2023.a907128","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ado.2023.a907128","url":null,"abstract":"abstract: In this conversation, Emily Hipchen speaks with Dr. Alice Diver (School of Law, QUB, N. Ireland) about some of the themes underpinning her publication, \"'Monstrous Othering': The Gothic Nature of Origin-Tracing in Law and Literature\" (November 2021). The conversation opens with a brief discussion of their own respective experiences as \"mother and baby home\" adoptees in the US and Canada in the 1960s before turning to an analysis of how the particular adoptee brand of \"fearful otherness\" is often represented—and indeed perpetuated—in certain works of \"monstrous orphan\" fiction. In respect of achieving meaningful sociolegal and cultural reforms, language is key. The debates surrounding the wording of Ireland's controversial Birth Information and Tracing Act (2022) highlighted how lingering prejudices still attach to the topic of adoption and to the need to find one's origins. Discriminatory barriers to access—and contact with genetic relatives—still exist: the use of labels matters, too, as the controversy over the use of the term \"birth mother\" within the legislation (since amended to \"mother\") also evidenced. Though mainly relevant to adoptee rights, and adoption law and policy, debates and discourse on language may also impact on other areas where losses of origins occur, such as surrogacy and international adoption.","PeriodicalId":140707,"journal":{"name":"Adoption & Culture","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135549812","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.1353/ado.2023.a907125
Corey Abell
abstract: The following paper draws attention to a lesser-studied subject in Critical Adoption Studies: foster care. I argue that this lack of attentiveness towards systems of care and the experiences of fostered children mirror a societal trend in which traditional ideals of the biological family and more recent post-biological ideals in the form of adoptive practices have created an ideological construct in which foster subjectivities are seen as identity-less. That is, the two poles of "biological family" and "adoptive family" support a particular normativity centered on a nuclear family ideal which then excludes foster families/children from membership—stereotyping foster care as inherently incapable of providing children a full and meaningful life. Ultimately, this ideological system prefers adoption, presenting it as the solution to all experiences of fostered and orphaned children. And nowhere is this ideology more present than in our society's most revered cultural productions—where orphans and foster children are continuously disparaged or misrepresented. My target for analysis in this paper will be the monumental Star Wars franchise, and in particular its three main trilogies, The Skywalker Saga . I will show how its most recent trilogy (2015–2019) embodies the transition from a biocentric normativity excluding all nonbiological families, to a status quo which has normalized adoptive-family making. Alongside a traditional biological familial ideal, adoptive families are regarded as a conventional family , and are thus capable of offering otherwise down-and-out children with meaningful lives and full identities. As this new ideological structure (what I refer to below as the ideological dyad ) becomes more entrenched in our culture, little room is left for an alternative understanding for how the systemic issues associated with a system like foster care might be addressed.
{"title":"Fostering a Dark Side: The Role of Adopting-out in Contemporary Portrayals of Abandoned or Lost Children in Star Wars","authors":"Corey Abell","doi":"10.1353/ado.2023.a907125","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ado.2023.a907125","url":null,"abstract":"abstract: The following paper draws attention to a lesser-studied subject in Critical Adoption Studies: foster care. I argue that this lack of attentiveness towards systems of care and the experiences of fostered children mirror a societal trend in which traditional ideals of the biological family and more recent post-biological ideals in the form of adoptive practices have created an ideological construct in which foster subjectivities are seen as identity-less. That is, the two poles of \"biological family\" and \"adoptive family\" support a particular normativity centered on a nuclear family ideal which then excludes foster families/children from membership—stereotyping foster care as inherently incapable of providing children a full and meaningful life. Ultimately, this ideological system prefers adoption, presenting it as the solution to all experiences of fostered and orphaned children. And nowhere is this ideology more present than in our society's most revered cultural productions—where orphans and foster children are continuously disparaged or misrepresented. My target for analysis in this paper will be the monumental Star Wars franchise, and in particular its three main trilogies, The Skywalker Saga . I will show how its most recent trilogy (2015–2019) embodies the transition from a biocentric normativity excluding all nonbiological families, to a status quo which has normalized adoptive-family making. Alongside a traditional biological familial ideal, adoptive families are regarded as a conventional family , and are thus capable of offering otherwise down-and-out children with meaningful lives and full identities. As this new ideological structure (what I refer to below as the ideological dyad ) becomes more entrenched in our culture, little room is left for an alternative understanding for how the systemic issues associated with a system like foster care might be addressed.","PeriodicalId":140707,"journal":{"name":"Adoption & Culture","volume":"75 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135549819","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.1353/ado.2023.a907134
Reviewed by: American Baby: A Mother, A Child, and the Shadow History of Adoption by Gabrielle Glaser Marianne Novy (bio) Rev. of American Baby: A Mother, A Child, and the Shadow History of Adoption GABRIELLE GLASER, Viking, 2020 343 pp. $28.00 (hardback) ISBN: 9780735224681 Gabrielle Glaser's American Baby: A Mother, A Child and the Shadow History of Adoption combines the attention to emotion of a memoir (though the memories are found by interviewing) with the big picture research of a journalist to provide a stunning indictment of the procedures of some adoption agencies and maternity homes. She focuses on a 1961 case where the forced relinquishment for adoption is particularly egregious because the birthparents planned to marry but the girl, at seventeen, was threatened by her social worker with juvenile hall if she did not sign relinquishment papers, and where the consequences of sealed records were particularly harmful because of inherited tendencies toward disease that killed the adoptee in his fifties. A science writer with a focus on reproductive issues, Glaser met David Rosenberg when they both lived in Oregon during his long search to locate his birth-parents, and was touched by his story, which included a kidney donation from a friend in the absence of biological kin. They stayed in touch. Years later, after she moved to New York, where he was born and spent much of his childhood, he told her when DNA analysis put him in contact with his still-New-York-resident birthmother, Margaret Katz. Glaser learned in her interviews about the tyranny of Margaret's mother, who signed the papers removing her daughter's legal custody and allowing little Stephen, David's birth name, to be moved to a foster home without her knowledge. While in foster care, he was moved three times before he was given to the Rosenbergs. Margaret had been under surveillance in a maternity home where she was given no information about childbirth or birth control and told to make no friends there and forget everything. The agency, Louise Wise, lied about adoptive parents to Margaret and about Margaret and her fiancé to the adoptive parents. By the time the adoption papers were signed, Margaret and her fiancé were married, but this did not return her maternal rights. Even her attempts to protect her adopted-away child by telling Louise Wise, when his grandparents were diagnosed with three forms of cancer and his birthfather with sarcoidosis and diabetes, were frustrated. She was always told not to call, eventually threatened with police intervention; the information was never passed on to her son. Margaret feared that her next son will be taken and always wondered about Stephen when she saw dark-haired little boys near his age. Glaser puts this narrative, many of its details familiar from birthmothers' memoirs, in a larger frame by her research—Stephen's file reveals that one pediatrician prescribed the addictive drug phenobarbital for sleep problems at six weeks (82)—and s
书评:《美国婴儿:一个母亲，一个孩子，和收养的影子历史》作者:加布里埃尔·格拉泽玛丽安·诺维(传记)《美国婴儿:一个母亲，一个孩子，和收养的影子历史》作者:加布里埃尔·格拉泽，维京，2020 343页，28.00美元(精装本)ISBN: 9780735224681《母亲，孩子和收养的阴影历史》将回忆录对情感的关注(尽管这些记忆是通过采访发现的)与记者的宏观研究结合起来，对一些收养机构和妇产院的程序进行了惊人的控诉。她关注的是1961年的一个案例，强迫放弃收养是非常恶劣的，因为生父母计划结婚，但17岁的女孩，如果她不签署放弃文件，就会受到青少年管教所的社会工作者的威胁，而密封记录的后果尤其有害，因为遗传了疾病的倾向，导致被收养者在50多岁时死亡。格拉泽是一位关注生殖问题的科学作家，在他长期寻找亲生父母的过程中，他和大卫·罗森伯格住在俄勒冈州，他被他的故事所感动，其中包括一位朋友在没有亲生亲属的情况下捐赠的肾脏。他们一直保持联系。多年后，她搬到了纽约，他在那里出生并度过了大部分童年时光。他告诉她，DNA分析发现他与仍然住在纽约的生母玛格丽特·卡茨(Margaret Katz)有过联系。格拉泽在采访中了解到玛格丽特母亲的专横，她签署了文件，剥夺了她女儿的合法监护权，允许小斯蒂芬(大卫的本名)在她不知情的情况下被转移到寄养家庭。在被寄养期间，他被转移了三次才被送到罗森伯格家。玛格丽特一直在一家妇产之家受到监视，在那里她没有得到任何有关分娩或避孕的信息，并被告知不要在那里交朋友，忘记一切。中介路易丝·怀斯向玛格丽特隐瞒了养父母的事，又向养父母隐瞒了玛格丽特和她未婚夫的事。当收养文件签署的时候，玛格丽特和她的未婚夫结婚了，但这并没有恢复她作为母亲的权利。当他的祖父母被诊断出患有三种癌症，他的生父被诊断出患有结节病和糖尿病时，她试图告诉路易丝·怀斯，以保护她的被收养的孩子，但都失败了。她总是被告知不要打电话，最后还被威胁要警察介入;这个消息从未传给她的儿子。玛格丽特担心她的下一个儿子会被带走，当她看到和他年龄相仿的黑发小男孩时，她总是对斯蒂芬感到奇怪。格拉泽把这个故事，其中许多细节从生母的回忆录中熟悉，放在她研究的更大框架中——斯蒂芬的档案显示，一位儿科医生为六周(82)大的婴儿开了成瘾性药物苯巴比妥来治疗睡眠问题——她了解到其他令人不安的事实，即婴儿在收养机构的监护下是如何被对待的，没有人保护他们。作为实验的一部分，新生儿和大一点的婴儿被用橡胶带制成的枪“射击”，以测试他们对疼痛的反应，这被认为是显示他们的智力，并帮助他们找到“合适的”养父母。在另一项实验中，路易丝·怀斯(Louise Wise)将双胞胎和三胞胎分开，并将他们安置在父母风格不同(有些显然很难)的家庭中，以测试先天和后天的相对重要性。尽管约翰·鲍尔比(John Bowlby)在1951年出版的《母亲照顾与心理健康》(Maternal Care and Mental Health)一书中讨论了儿童对一致性的需求，并广为流传，但该机构和其他机构还是将儿童安置在寄养中心，以便在给他们一个永久的家之前测试他们的智力。但除了这些与她的核心人物直接相关的故事之外，格拉塞还提供了美国收养的简史，包括19世纪将儿童运送到契约奴役的孤儿火车，96%的儿童可能会死亡的婴儿农场，黑市婴儿的出售，以及……
{"title":"American Baby: A Mother, A Child, and the Shadow History of Adoption by Gabrielle Glaser (review)","authors":"","doi":"10.1353/ado.2023.a907134","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ado.2023.a907134","url":null,"abstract":"Reviewed by: American Baby: A Mother, A Child, and the Shadow History of Adoption by Gabrielle Glaser Marianne Novy (bio) Rev. of American Baby: A Mother, A Child, and the Shadow History of Adoption GABRIELLE GLASER, Viking, 2020 343 pp. $28.00 (hardback) ISBN: 9780735224681 Gabrielle Glaser's American Baby: A Mother, A Child and the Shadow History of Adoption combines the attention to emotion of a memoir (though the memories are found by interviewing) with the big picture research of a journalist to provide a stunning indictment of the procedures of some adoption agencies and maternity homes. She focuses on a 1961 case where the forced relinquishment for adoption is particularly egregious because the birthparents planned to marry but the girl, at seventeen, was threatened by her social worker with juvenile hall if she did not sign relinquishment papers, and where the consequences of sealed records were particularly harmful because of inherited tendencies toward disease that killed the adoptee in his fifties. A science writer with a focus on reproductive issues, Glaser met David Rosenberg when they both lived in Oregon during his long search to locate his birth-parents, and was touched by his story, which included a kidney donation from a friend in the absence of biological kin. They stayed in touch. Years later, after she moved to New York, where he was born and spent much of his childhood, he told her when DNA analysis put him in contact with his still-New-York-resident birthmother, Margaret Katz. Glaser learned in her interviews about the tyranny of Margaret's mother, who signed the papers removing her daughter's legal custody and allowing little Stephen, David's birth name, to be moved to a foster home without her knowledge. While in foster care, he was moved three times before he was given to the Rosenbergs. Margaret had been under surveillance in a maternity home where she was given no information about childbirth or birth control and told to make no friends there and forget everything. The agency, Louise Wise, lied about adoptive parents to Margaret and about Margaret and her fiancé to the adoptive parents. By the time the adoption papers were signed, Margaret and her fiancé were married, but this did not return her maternal rights. Even her attempts to protect her adopted-away child by telling Louise Wise, when his grandparents were diagnosed with three forms of cancer and his birthfather with sarcoidosis and diabetes, were frustrated. She was always told not to call, eventually threatened with police intervention; the information was never passed on to her son. Margaret feared that her next son will be taken and always wondered about Stephen when she saw dark-haired little boys near his age. Glaser puts this narrative, many of its details familiar from birthmothers' memoirs, in a larger frame by her research—Stephen's file reveals that one pediatrician prescribed the addictive drug phenobarbital for sleep problems at six weeks (82)—and s","PeriodicalId":140707,"journal":{"name":"Adoption & Culture","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135549816","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.1353/ado.2023.a907130
Mary Cardaras, Gabrielle Glaser, Gregory Luce, Gonda Van Steen
abstract: This roundtable discussion in which four participants take part allows adopted persons and those with experience of adoption to reflect on the enduring nature of adoption, the writing process that tries to capture it, and the challenges that in-country as well as intercountry adoptions still present. Guiding questions are: 1) How did you come to the process of writing? What does your genre of writing entail and what does it bring to the conversation about adoption? What made this writing happen and why now? 2) How would you define the "unfinished business" of adoption? Does it relate to the role that access to birth and adoption records plays? Is access a matter of institutional/legal challenges and/or psychological and even medical concerns? 3) What do you see as the main similarities and differences between in-country and intercountry adoptions? How do you see the two converge or drift apart in the near future? 4) What has changed recently in the adoption discussion? What remains to be debated and fought for?
{"title":"Adoption's Unfinished Business: A Roundtable Discussion","authors":"Mary Cardaras, Gabrielle Glaser, Gregory Luce, Gonda Van Steen","doi":"10.1353/ado.2023.a907130","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ado.2023.a907130","url":null,"abstract":"abstract: This roundtable discussion in which four participants take part allows adopted persons and those with experience of adoption to reflect on the enduring nature of adoption, the writing process that tries to capture it, and the challenges that in-country as well as intercountry adoptions still present. Guiding questions are: 1) How did you come to the process of writing? What does your genre of writing entail and what does it bring to the conversation about adoption? What made this writing happen and why now? 2) How would you define the \"unfinished business\" of adoption? Does it relate to the role that access to birth and adoption records plays? Is access a matter of institutional/legal challenges and/or psychological and even medical concerns? 3) What do you see as the main similarities and differences between in-country and intercountry adoptions? How do you see the two converge or drift apart in the near future? 4) What has changed recently in the adoption discussion? What remains to be debated and fought for?","PeriodicalId":140707,"journal":{"name":"Adoption & Culture","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135549810","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.1353/ado.2023.a907133
Reviewed by: Adoption, Memory, and Cold War Greece: Kid Pro Quo? by Gonda Van Steen Kelly Condit-Shrestha (bio) Rev. of Adoption, Memory, and Cold War Greece: Kid Pro Quo? GONDA VAN STEEN U of Michigan P, 2019. 350 pp. 18 illustrations, 1 table. $94.95 (cloth) $39.95 (paper) ISBN: 9780472131587 In this rigorous historical undertaking, Gonda Van Steen endeavors to insert, elevate, and center postwar US-Greek international adoption history into the now robust field of American adoption studies. This framing rests on the book's assertion that the overseas migration of more than three thousand Greek children into American families during the early Cold War period "provided the blueprint for the first large-scale international adoptions, well before these became a mass phenomenon typically associated with Asian children" (book cover). In line with the author's bold claim, Adoption, Memory, and Cold War Greece is ambitiously structured to serve as an intervention in transnational adoption history, expand the optic of what is Greek national history, and elevate family narratives and adoptee perspectives within these larger frameworks. Adoption, Memory, and Cold War Greece is theoretically and methodologically sophisticated. Drawing from Greek and English language sources, Van Steen's history, written from a Greek national perspective, takes shape through multidisciplinary, historically grounded readings across an extensive spread of archival and lived experiences, including personal interviews and communications; institutional, family, and legal records; newspaper, alternate media, and artistic representations—in the aftermath of World War II, subsequent Greek Civil War, and as expressed through contemporary legacy. Interweaving the aforementioned source material, the monograph is organized across three parts. In Part 1, "The Past That Has Not Passed: Memories from Another Greece," Van Steen utilizes the tragic story of the Argyriadis family to grapple with the politics of Greek nationalist postmemory, the violence of the state's legal deployments to create family separations, and the active institutional participation of Metera and PIKPA (Patriotic Institution for Social Welfare and Awareness) to induce adoption trauma. Part 2, [End Page 129] "Nation of Orphans, Orphaned Nation," expands the book's narrative beyond Greece's early "political" adoptions (2) to illuminate how Cold War "pull factors" and transnational stakeholders—American prospective adoptive parents, private lawyers, and the competing interests of such institutions as Ahepa (Order of the American Hellenic Educational Progressive Association) and the ISS (International Social Service)—transformed the practice beyond the scope of PIKPA and Metera. Part 3, "Insights from Greek Adoption Cases: There Is Power in Knowing Your Story," explicitly elevates the personal stories, testimonies, and experiences of Greek-born adoptees, themselves—which in turn elevates fraud and dishonesty as central b
收养、记忆和冷战希腊:孩子的交换条件?作者:Gonda Van Steen Kelly Condit-Shrestha(传记)《收养、记忆和冷战时期的希腊:孩子的交换条件?》密歇根大学GONDA VAN STEEN, 2019。350页，18幅插图，1张表格。在这本严谨的历史著作中，冈达·范·斯蒂恩努力将战后美国-希腊国际收养史插入、提升和集中到现在蓬勃发展的美国收养研究领域。这个框架基于书中的断言，即在冷战早期，3000多名希腊儿童移民到美国家庭，“为第一次大规模的国际收养提供了蓝图，远远早于这些成为典型的与亚洲儿童有关的大规模现象”(书的封面)。与作者大胆的主张一致，《收养、记忆和冷战时期的希腊》的结构雄心勃勃，旨在作为对跨国收养史的干预，扩展希腊民族历史的视野，并在这些更大的框架内提升家庭叙事和被收养者的视角。《收养、记忆和冷战》中的希腊在理论和方法上都很复杂。从希腊语和英语的语言来源，范·斯蒂恩的历史，从希腊民族的角度写的，通过多学科，历史为基础的阅读在档案和生活经验的广泛传播，包括个人采访和通信形成;机构、家庭和法律记录;报纸，替代媒体和艺术表现-在第二次世界大战之后，随后的希腊内战，并通过当代遗产表达。本专著穿插上述原始资料，分为三部分。在第一部分“尚未过去的过去:来自另一个希腊的记忆”中，范·斯蒂恩利用Argyriadis家庭的悲剧故事来应对希腊民族主义后记忆的政治，国家法律部署的暴力造成家庭分离，以及Metera和PIKPA(爱国社会福利和意识机构)的积极机构参与导致收养创伤。第二部分，“孤儿之国，孤儿之国”，将本书的叙述扩展到希腊早期的“政治”收养(2)之外，阐明了冷战“拉动因素”和跨国利益相关者——美国潜在的养父母、私人律师，以及Ahepa(美国希腊教育进步协会)和ISS(国际社会服务)等机构的竞争利益——如何改变了PIKPA和Metera范围之外的实践。第三部分，“希腊收养案例的启示:了解你的故事是有力量的”，明确地提升了希腊出生的被收养者的个人故事，证词和经历，他们自己，这反过来又提升了欺诈和不诚实作为美希收养运作的核心基础。在阅读这本专著时，正如范·斯蒂恩所指出的，“这本书的所有三个部分都可以按顺序阅读，但也可以分开阅读”(10)。她为读者提供指导和方向:建议，例如，“[那些]了解20世纪希腊历史的人，以及被收养的人自己可能想要推迟阅读第一部分，立即开始阅读第二部分”(10)。作者的内容图说明了这本书的野心。作为一名历史学家，我不得不对《收养、记忆和冷战希腊》所包含的工作、深度和研究印象深刻。然而，作者给读者的这些注释也说明了本书面临的挑战。这本专著的叙述和贡献并不是自然地交织在一起的，书中不同时刻的密集的散文使得这些叙述很难找到或遵循。因此，在《收养》、《记忆》和《冷战时期的希腊》中，我们可以找到令人难以置信的珍宝，比如范·斯蒂恩(Van Steen)对希腊的描述:“毫无疑问，从1948年到1962年，希腊的年人均收养率是最高的”(81)，家庭连锁移民在该国早期收养时期的重要作用，以及不公开记录收养过程的危险，但这些贡献往往被掩盖在本书的组织架构中。此外，虽然这项研究早就应该关注希腊了(86)，但我不禁反思，如果采用更交叉的方法，就会错失一些机会。例如，与其仅仅把希腊历史化为“明显的例外……”
{"title":"Adoption, Memory, and Cold War Greece: Kid Pro Quo? by Gonda Van Steen (review)","authors":"","doi":"10.1353/ado.2023.a907133","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ado.2023.a907133","url":null,"abstract":"Reviewed by: Adoption, Memory, and Cold War Greece: Kid Pro Quo? by Gonda Van Steen Kelly Condit-Shrestha (bio) Rev. of Adoption, Memory, and Cold War Greece: Kid Pro Quo? GONDA VAN STEEN U of Michigan P, 2019. 350 pp. 18 illustrations, 1 table. $94.95 (cloth) $39.95 (paper) ISBN: 9780472131587 In this rigorous historical undertaking, Gonda Van Steen endeavors to insert, elevate, and center postwar US-Greek international adoption history into the now robust field of American adoption studies. This framing rests on the book's assertion that the overseas migration of more than three thousand Greek children into American families during the early Cold War period \"provided the blueprint for the first large-scale international adoptions, well before these became a mass phenomenon typically associated with Asian children\" (book cover). In line with the author's bold claim, Adoption, Memory, and Cold War Greece is ambitiously structured to serve as an intervention in transnational adoption history, expand the optic of what is Greek national history, and elevate family narratives and adoptee perspectives within these larger frameworks. Adoption, Memory, and Cold War Greece is theoretically and methodologically sophisticated. Drawing from Greek and English language sources, Van Steen's history, written from a Greek national perspective, takes shape through multidisciplinary, historically grounded readings across an extensive spread of archival and lived experiences, including personal interviews and communications; institutional, family, and legal records; newspaper, alternate media, and artistic representations—in the aftermath of World War II, subsequent Greek Civil War, and as expressed through contemporary legacy. Interweaving the aforementioned source material, the monograph is organized across three parts. In Part 1, \"The Past That Has Not Passed: Memories from Another Greece,\" Van Steen utilizes the tragic story of the Argyriadis family to grapple with the politics of Greek nationalist postmemory, the violence of the state's legal deployments to create family separations, and the active institutional participation of Metera and PIKPA (Patriotic Institution for Social Welfare and Awareness) to induce adoption trauma. Part 2, [End Page 129] \"Nation of Orphans, Orphaned Nation,\" expands the book's narrative beyond Greece's early \"political\" adoptions (2) to illuminate how Cold War \"pull factors\" and transnational stakeholders—American prospective adoptive parents, private lawyers, and the competing interests of such institutions as Ahepa (Order of the American Hellenic Educational Progressive Association) and the ISS (International Social Service)—transformed the practice beyond the scope of PIKPA and Metera. Part 3, \"Insights from Greek Adoption Cases: There Is Power in Knowing Your Story,\" explicitly elevates the personal stories, testimonies, and experiences of Greek-born adoptees, themselves—which in turn elevates fraud and dishonesty as central b","PeriodicalId":140707,"journal":{"name":"Adoption & Culture","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135549822","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.1353/ado.2023.a907129
Sara Dorow, Allyson Stevenson, Sadaf Mirzahi
abstract: Adoption & Culture 's series of anniversary articles has affirmed critical adoption studies (CAS) as a growing, diverse, and continually relevant field of inquiry. As part of this endeavor, two adoption scholars created a collaborative dialogue on what it means to "do" CAS from the unique but overlapping perspectives of their two distinct research projects: Dorow's sociological work on late twentieth century China-US adoption and Stevenson's historical work on mid-twentieth century Indigenous adoption in Canada. Reflecting together on their respective approaches and methodologies, they focus on the intimate politics of kinship-nation-race that animate both of these contexts of adoption, while also noting the specific questions and issues that emerge from each distinct context. The conclusion offers three questions for the ongoing work of CAS and asserts the need for more interdisciplinary and pluralistic studies across seemingly disparate cases.
{"title":"A Critical Adoption Dialogue about the Race-Family-Nation Nexus","authors":"Sara Dorow, Allyson Stevenson, Sadaf Mirzahi","doi":"10.1353/ado.2023.a907129","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ado.2023.a907129","url":null,"abstract":"abstract: Adoption & Culture 's series of anniversary articles has affirmed critical adoption studies (CAS) as a growing, diverse, and continually relevant field of inquiry. As part of this endeavor, two adoption scholars created a collaborative dialogue on what it means to \"do\" CAS from the unique but overlapping perspectives of their two distinct research projects: Dorow's sociological work on late twentieth century China-US adoption and Stevenson's historical work on mid-twentieth century Indigenous adoption in Canada. Reflecting together on their respective approaches and methodologies, they focus on the intimate politics of kinship-nation-race that animate both of these contexts of adoption, while also noting the specific questions and issues that emerge from each distinct context. The conclusion offers three questions for the ongoing work of CAS and asserts the need for more interdisciplinary and pluralistic studies across seemingly disparate cases.","PeriodicalId":140707,"journal":{"name":"Adoption & Culture","volume":"22 5","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135549825","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In this essay I explore salvation narratives in abortion and adoption dialogues, including the decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, to highlight the complex ways such stories function to divert attention from state regulation of families in support of a white supremacist, patriarchal agenda for the nation. I argue that these stories emphasizing salvation function as a way of hiding intersections of racism, misogyny, and homophobia driving this conservative social vision. Drawing on interdisciplinary narrative analysis, I consider laws and policies as stories about how society should function. In a “color-blind” legal system race cannot be an explicit consideration, yet exploring family laws in relation to each other, in a larger context of sociopolitical meaning, helps us see the ways in which all these social narratives function together as what Evelyn Brooks Higginbotham calls the “metalanguage of race.”
在这篇文章中，我探讨了堕胎和收养对话中的救赎叙事，包括多布斯诉杰克逊妇女健康组织(Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization)一案的决定，以突出这些故事的复杂方式，将人们的注意力从国家对家庭的监管转移到支持白人至上主义和男权主义的国家议程上。我认为，这些强调救赎的故事是隐藏种族主义、厌女症和恐同症的交叉点的一种方式，这些交叉点推动着保守的社会愿景。借鉴跨学科的叙事分析，我认为法律和政策是关于社会应该如何运作的故事。在一个“色盲”的法律体系中，种族不可能是一个明确的考虑因素，然而，在更大的社会政治意义背景下，探索家庭法之间的关系，有助于我们看到所有这些社会叙事共同发挥作用的方式，正如伊夫林·布鲁克斯·希金波坦(Evelyn Brooks Higginbotham)所说的“种族元语言”。
{"title":"Saving Innocence","authors":"Sandra Patton-Imani","doi":"10.1353/ado.0.0025","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ado.0.0025","url":null,"abstract":"In this essay I explore salvation narratives in abortion and adoption dialogues, including the decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, to highlight the complex ways such stories function to divert attention from state regulation of families in support of a white supremacist, patriarchal agenda for the nation. I argue that these stories emphasizing salvation function as a way of hiding intersections of racism, misogyny, and homophobia driving this conservative social vision. Drawing on interdisciplinary narrative analysis, I consider laws and policies as stories about how society should function. In a “color-blind” legal system race cannot be an explicit consideration, yet exploring family laws in relation to each other, in a larger context of sociopolitical meaning, helps us see the ways in which all these social narratives function together as what Evelyn Brooks Higginbotham calls the “metalanguage of race.”","PeriodicalId":140707,"journal":{"name":"Adoption & Culture","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125246882","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Popular discourse around the Dobbs v. Jackson’s Women’s Health Organization decision framed adoption as an equivalent solution to abortion for the problem of unwanted pregnancies. Proposing adoption as a simple solution to a complex social or political problem is not new, and this article traces a lineage of such arguments, noting the ways that they marginalize both adoptees and birth families.
围绕多布斯诉杰克逊妇女健康组织(Dobbs v. Jackson’s Women’s Health Organization)一案的流行讨论，将收养视为解决意外怀孕问题的一种与堕胎同等的解决方案。将收养作为复杂社会或政治问题的简单解决方案并不新鲜，本文追溯了此类论点的沿路，指出了它们将被收养者和生身家庭都边缘化的方式。
{"title":"“Less Abortion, More Adoption”: A Brief Discursive History of Adoption as Solution","authors":"S. Idzik","doi":"10.1353/ado.0.0023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ado.0.0023","url":null,"abstract":"Popular discourse around the Dobbs v. Jackson’s Women’s Health Organization decision framed adoption as an equivalent solution to abortion for the problem of unwanted pregnancies. Proposing adoption as a simple solution to a complex social or political problem is not new, and this article traces a lineage of such arguments, noting the ways that they marginalize both adoptees and birth families.","PeriodicalId":140707,"journal":{"name":"Adoption & Culture","volume":"31 3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134223342","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This essay blends creative nonfiction and autoethnography to problematize the anti-choice rhetoric of adoption as a solution to abortion through the lenses of reproductive justice and adoptee lived experience.
{"title":"Aren’t You Glad You Weren’t Aborted? An Open Letter from an Adoptee","authors":"Liz Debetta","doi":"10.1353/ado.0.0024","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ado.0.0024","url":null,"abstract":"This essay blends creative nonfiction and autoethnography to problematize the anti-choice rhetoric of adoption as a solution to abortion through the lenses of reproductive justice and adoptee lived experience.","PeriodicalId":140707,"journal":{"name":"Adoption & Culture","volume":"57 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116603478","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Kathy Livingston, Margaret A. Sabec, Members of Ohio Birthparent Group
This article explores birthmothers’ perceptions of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision and the influence of abortion politics on their experiences with pregnancy, adoption, and post-adoption support. Six birthparents, including the author, participated in roundtable discussions on Zoom to share perspectives on Dobbs. All participants are former members of Ohio Birthparent Group, a birthparent-led post-adoption support group in Ohio that was active from 2010–2018.
{"title":"Birthmothers on Abortion: A Roundtable Discussion with Members of Ohio Birthparent Group on the Impacts of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization","authors":"Kathy Livingston, Margaret A. Sabec, Members of Ohio Birthparent Group","doi":"10.1353/ado.0.0022","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ado.0.0022","url":null,"abstract":"This article explores birthmothers’ perceptions of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision and the influence of abortion politics on their experiences with pregnancy, adoption, and post-adoption support. Six birthparents, including the author, participated in roundtable discussions on Zoom to share perspectives on Dobbs. All participants are former members of Ohio Birthparent Group, a birthparent-led post-adoption support group in Ohio that was active from 2010–2018.","PeriodicalId":140707,"journal":{"name":"Adoption & Culture","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114614272","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：