Characteristics of children transitioned to intercountry adoption,domestic adoption,foster care,and biological families from institutions in St Petersburg,Russian Federation
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online November, 2016
Characteristics of children transitioned to intercountry adoption,domestic adoption,foster care,and biological families from institutions in St Petersburg,Russian Federation
Young children (N = 381) from three institutions in St Petersburg (Russian Federation) who were transitioned to intercountry (USA) adoption or to various domestic families in Russia did not differ in birth weight, length, head circumference, and rated condition at birth, nor did they differ upon departure from the institutions with respect to physical growth and behavioral development. These results provide little support to the occasional allegation for the possibility that intercountry adopted children are selected to be developmentally more (or less) advanced, or that outcomes for children in alternative family placements simply may be associated with pre-placement developmental differences. The generality of these results to other institutions and countries is unknown.
BartholetE. (2007) ‘International Adoption: Thoughts on the Human Rights Issues’, Buffalo Human Rights Law Review13: 151–203.
2.
CarroJ.L. (1994) ‘Regulation of Intercountry Adoption: Can the Abuses Come to an End?’, Hastings International and Comparative Law Review18(12): 131–41.
HellerstedtW.L.MadsenN.J.GunnarM.R.GrotevantH.D.LeeR.N.JohnsonD.E. (2008) ‘The International Adoption Project: Population-based Surveillance of Minnesota Parents Who Adopted Children Internationally’, Maternal and Child Health Journal12(2): 162–71.
5.
JulianM.McCallR.B. (2011) ‘The Development of Children within Different Alternative Residential Care Environments’, International Journal of Child and Family Welfare3–4: 119–47.
McCallR.B. (2011) ‘Research, Practice, and Policy Perspectives on Issues of Children without Permanent Parental Care’, in McCallR.B.van IJzendoornM.H.JufferF.GroarkC.J.GrozaV.K. (eds) ‘Children without Permanent Parents: Research, Practice, and Policy’, Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 76, Serial No. 301(4): 223–272.
8.
McCallR.B.GroarkC.J.FishL.MuhamedrahimovR.J.PalmovO.I.NikiforovaN.V. (2013) ‘Maintaining a Social-Emotional Intervention and its Benefits for Institutionalized Children’, Child Development84(5): 1734–49.
SmolinD.M. (2006) ‘Child Laundering: How the Intercountry Adoption System Legitimizes and Incentivizes the Practice of Buying, Trafficking, Kidnapping and Stealing Children’, Wayne Law Review52: 113–99.
11.
OreskovicJ.MaskewT. (2008) ‘Red Thread or Slender Reed: Deconstructing Professor Bartholet’s Mythology of International Adoption’, Buffalo Human Rights Law Review14: 71–128.
12.
The St Petersburg-USA Orphanage Research Team (2005) ‘Characteristics of Children, Caregivers, and Orphanages for Young Children in St. Petersburg, Russian Federation’, Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology: Special Issue on Child Abandonment26: 477–506.
13.
The St Petersburg-USA Orphanage Research Team (2008) ‘The Effects of Early Social-emotional and Relationship Experience on the Development of Young Orphanage Children’, Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 73, Serial No. 291(3).
14.
US Bureau of Customs and Immigration Enforcement (2004) ‘Backgrounder: Operation Broken Hearts’, 19November, available online at: http://www.ethicanet.org/galindo_backgr.pdf
Van IJzendoornM.H.JufferF. (2006) ‘The Emanuel Miller Memorial Lecture 2006: Adoption as Intervention. Meta-analytic Evidence for Massive Catch-up and Plasticity in Physical, Socio-emotional, and Cognitive Development’, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry47(12): 1228–45.
17.
Van IJzendoornM.H.EuserE.M.PrinzieP.JufferF.Bakermans-KranenburgM.J. (2009) ‘Elevated Risk of Child Maltreatment in Families with Step-parents but Not with Adoptive Parents’, Child Maltreatment14(4): 369–75.
