Study confirms Angelina Jolie was right
Categories: Just for moms, Just for dads, Adoption, Divorce & custody, Fun & activities
You may remember that, a while back, Angelina Jolie came out saying that adoptive parents are more fit to raise their kids than biological parents. A new study published in the American Sociological Review appears to support her contention. The study found that adoptive parents spend more money on their kids, read to them more, are more likely to eat together, and even discuss their problems more."One of the reasons adoptive parents invest more is that they really want children, and they go to extraordinary means to have them," says Indiana University sociologist Brian Powell, one of the study's authors. "Adoptive parents face a culture where, to many other people, adoption is not real parenthood," Powell added. "What they're trying to do is compensate. ... They recognize the barriers they face, and it sets the stage for them to be better parents."
Adam Pertman, executive director of the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute, was appreciative of the study's findings, but noted that "there are all sorts of families that are good for kids. Adoptive parents aren't less good or better. They just bring different benefits to the table. In terms of how families are formed, it should be a level playing field."
I think that parents -- biological, adoptive, or any other sort -- are the most important part of a child's world. How they became parents, the struggles they faced, and any other facets of the parenting adventure are simply the flavors and spices that make each family unique. The important part -- the meat and potatoes -- is the love that families share.
Recent Posts
- Weekend Fun and Games (7/03/2009)
- Kids and Extracurriculars - When Do You Let Them Quit? (7/03/2009)
- Twitter Follow Friday on ParentDish! (7/03/2009)
- Lush Lashes (7/03/2009)
- Abigail Breslin Makes $13 a Week (7/03/2009)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
SKL 2-14-2007 @ 12:09AM
I am not surprised that adoptive parents get high marks on many measures. It's not so much the fact that we have been screened down to every aspect of our lives (is your fire extinguisher hanging in the right place, how many speeding tickets have you had, how much money do you make, do you get along with your sister-in-law . . . ). I think for most of us, the decision to adopt comes after many years of life experiences, yearning, disappointments, and research that make us wiser than we would have been if we'd had biological children at the traditional time.
And maybe the difficulties and uncertainties of adoption make us value our time with our children just a little bit more. Plus, unlike biological parenthood, adoptive parenthood doesn't often happen to folks who weren't intending to be parents just yet.
I don't agree with the comment that we are trying to "compensate" for not being biological parents. There is nothing to compensate for. What outsiders think about my family's formation will never affect my parenting style.
Reply
Laura Snow 2-14-2007 @ 7:21AM
While I think the study is fair, I disagree with one part of it. Just because I was able to have my child biologically, does not mean I love him any less or am not 'qualified' to be his parent. Sure my brother has 5 kids he probably isn't qualified to parent (nother story people) but not all biological parents think of kids as toys.
Reply
LS 2-14-2007 @ 10:44AM
To me, this just looks like one more gun in the "Mommy War". Not only can we berate each other over the Work vs Stay-at-Home decision, now we can beat up each other because we have biological or adopted children.
Seriously, I am offended that adoptive parents are seen as making more and better preparations than biological parents. I know of several parents, myself included, that waited a good long time (ten years, in my case) to prepare their life and their marriage for children. To say that because I carried him in my body rather than adopting him, that I am not as good a parent, is donwright insulting.
I cannot believe that my tax dollars are funding this crap. And I know that they are.
Reply
Jeanette 2-14-2007 @ 11:47AM
Of course there is not one clear-cut answer, but I would say that biological parents are generally better. My logic: adoptive parents work so hard to get their kids that is may become a sort of goal. Once the goal is attained, they may feel disillusioned or disappointed. Additionally, adoptive parents lack the bio bond that is so important. Of course they love their kids infinitely, but I doubt it comes close to bio love.
Reply
Jessica 2-14-2007 @ 12:47PM
I think Jeanette may be a bit off base. But not as off-base as this study/article. I think it is completely insulting and incorrect.
Reply
daisy 2-14-2007 @ 1:47PM
Wow, Jeannette, I can't love my son like you do because he's not my biological relative? I'm not sure how you can be in any position to comment on this if you don't have children through adoption. Some might argue we love our children more because our love doesn't depend on furthering our gene pool. I wouldn't argue that, but some would.
Parents who have children through birth and adoption say time and time again that the love is the same intensity for all their kids.
I did a lot of paperwork to find our way to our son, but far from disappointed, he amazes me every single day in so many ways. You are so off-base here it's ridiculous.
Reply
Jeanette 2-14-2007 @ 3:16PM
I'd rather be off-base than bitter, Daisy.
Reply
LS 2-14-2007 @ 4:31PM
Thank you, Jeannette and Daisy, for making my point about the "Mommy Wars". You illustrate my point perfectly. Parenting is not about who loves their child more, or who is better at it, or whatever. It's not a competition. It's about bringing our children up secure in the knowledge that it DOESN'T MATTER if they're adopted or biological, they are loved unconditionally. Period. All of this "I'm better than you are" nonsense is just crap, and it's up to us, as parents and NICE human beings to stop it dead in it's tracks.
Reply
SKL 2-14-2007 @ 4:41PM
I didn't take the study to imply that biological parents are not great parents. Just that on a few measures, on average, adoptive parents spent more time doing a few things.
Most biological parents are awesome, and some adoptive parents are awful, and I don't think this study negates either of these statements.
Reply
daisy 2-14-2007 @ 4:42PM
LS, I am not participating in Mommy Wars, simply arguing against the notion that by virtue of being a mother through adoption, I'm not bonded to my son.
Jeannette, why bitter? We chose to adopt. Are you suggesting infertile people are bitter? That's really lovely!
Reply
Christine 2-14-2007 @ 6:52PM
Same thing going on at an adoption board Im on. Adoptees are scoffing... Adoptive parents are gloating.
I think in this particular study there is SOOOOOOOOOOO much room for error and other things to be the contributing factor.... personality,age, number of children, personal familial background, career.. so much so that I dont really think that "adoptive or not" can really be nailed down as the reason. JMHO
Reply