Research on Adopted Siblings and Families

Research Summary

Written by Stephanie Townsend

Source: Berge, J. M., Green, K. M., Grotevant, H. D., & McRoy, R. G. (2006). Adolescent sibling narratives regarding contact in adoption. Adoption Quarterly, 9, 81 - 103.

Note: This study is a small part of a much larger project called the Minnesota-Texas Adoption Research Project. This larger project is one of few that is studying effects on birth mothers, adoptive parents, and adopted children simultaneously. It is a longitudinal study that has been going on for 20+ years now, following the same families.

Summary of Literature:

The authors started by summarizing the current literature on siblings in adoptive families. They noted that most of the past research has looked at factors such as birth order, family size, gender, and personality characteristics with a focus on issues like sibling rivalry and other dynamics. They noted that very little attention has been paid to the fact that the adoptees have complex kinship networks that include their own adoptive families, their first families, and in the case of adopted but not biologically related siblings there is also the potential for relationships with a sibling’s first family.

Purpose of this Study:

This study focused on two types of sibling groups: (1) adopted, non-biologically related siblings who each had contact with their first families and (2) adopted, non-biologically related siblings in which one of them had contact with their first family and the other did not. The overarching questions the researchers were asking were what the siblings’ experiences were with contact with first families and how the siblings communicate with each other about their adoptions.

Context of the Study:

The larger project that this study is a piece of started in 1984 and is still continuing. It currently involves approximately 720 individuals, including 190 adoptive families and 169 birth mothers. The adopted children in the study were adopted through voluntary placements facilitated by adoption agencies between the late 1970s and early 1980s. These families have various levels of openness in their arrangements, ranging from confidential to fully disclosed. 

Method of the Study:

From the larger study, families who had both an adopted child and a non-related adopted sibling and in which at least one of the siblings had contact with their first family were included. The data came from much larger interviews for the big project. The first wave of data collection was from 1987-1992. The second wave of interviews was from 1996-2000. Adoptive families were interviewed in their homes. Interviews included separate sessions with each parent and with the adopted child as well as a joint interview with the adoptive parents. The typical session at home lasted 4-5 hours with each adolescent being interviewed for 1-2 hours. Birth mothers were interviewed in their home, at the adoption agency, or by phone.  Typically birth mother interviews lasted 4-6 hours. There were 15 questions from the interviews with adopted children that were used in this study.

This sibling study included 21 sets of siblings in which both siblings had contact with their first mother and/or other first family. Additionally, there were 8 sets of siblings  in which only one of the siblings had contact with their first mother and/or other first family. All together there were 58 adopted siblings included, 32 females and 26 males. Almost all were white. Additionally, 12 first mothers of these children had completed interviews and their interviews were analyzed as well.

Key Findings:

Families Where Both Siblings Had Contact with First Families:

* Adolescents usually have contact with their sibling’s first family as well as their own and they look forward to that contact.

* Their sibling’s first mother was usually described as being like a “relative” or “friend”

* The relationships between birth/adoptive/sibling’s birth families were very permeable. Families tended to be defined to include everyone whether or not they were biologically or legally related.

* Siblings didn’t talk a lot about adoption because they viewed it as a “normal process” in the family.

* When adoption did come up in conversations between the siblings it was used as an opportunity for connecting with each other and feeling closer to each other.

Families Where One Sibling Had Contact with First Family but Other Sibling Did Not:

* Adolescents who did not have contact with their own first family see having contact with their sibling’s first family as a way to experience what it would be like if they knew their own first family.

* First mother/relatives of the sibling who had contact often included the sibling who did not have contact by sending birthday cards, including them in visits, etc.

* The sibling with no contact and the first family of the sibling with contact tended to treat each other like first family members even though they were not related.

* The sibling who did not have contact with their own first family often described their sibling’s first mother as being like a “friend”.

* The siblings who did not have contact with their own first family often wished they did based on the relationships they saw their sibling have.

* However, the sibling who did not have contact with their own first family usually did not report any feelings of jealousy or relationship problems with their sibling.

* Siblings spoke frequently about adoption. This talking seemed to be especially important for the sibling who did not have contact with their first family.

* Siblings who did not have contact with their first families were most likely to talk with their adoptive siblings and adoptive parents about adoption. They were less likely to talk with other people who aren’t as close to them.

Birth/First Mothers:

* Mothers tended to be very intentional in their contact with their child’s siblings. They reported doing things like sending birthday cards, asking about the sibling, and actively including them in visits.

* Mothers also reported not making distinctions that would exclude the other sibling. Rather, they tended to see everyone in the first family and adoptive family as being “family” in some way.

Implications:

The authors identified a number of implications for researchers, adoptions workers, and adoption agencies. (1) Researchers should continue to think more broadly of an adoptive kinship network and not to make arbitrary distinctions between types of families. The adolescents in this study clearly saw their families as being permeable and allowing for family-type relationships even between people who are not biologically or legally related. (2) Adoption workers can use these findings to help alleviate concerns adoptive parents may have regarding sibling relationships, especially rivalry over first families. These findings can also be used to provide positive examples of the various types of relationships that can emerge between first and adoptive families.

Implications:

The authors identified a number of implications for researchers, adoptions workers, and adoption agencies. (1) Researchers should continue to think more broadly of an adoptive kinship network and not to make arbitrary distinctions between types of families. The adolescents in this study clearly saw their families as being permeable and allowing for family-type relationships even between people who are not biologically or legally related. (2) Adoption workers can use these findings to help alleviate concerns adoptive parents may have regarding sibling relationships, especially rivalry over first families. These findings can also be used to provide positive examples of the various types of relationships that can emerge between first and adoptive families.