Scholars of transracial adoption (TRA) have theorized that neoliberal ideology—valuing unregulated markets, welfare-retrenchment, color-blindness, and privatized charity—has catalyzed support for TRA among political and religious conservatives as a way of relieving governments from subsidizing poor minority children in foster care or their families on welfare. Drawing on theories linking neoliberal ideology, conservative Protestantism, and race, I examine neoliberalism’s effect on support for TRA and its possible moderating relationship with evangelicalism across both Whites and non-Whites. Analyses of national survey data demonstrate that both neoliberalism and evangelicalism in their main-effects are either unassociated or negatively associated with TRA approval. However, neoliberalism interacts with evangelicalism such that evangelicals who hold more strongly to neoliberal views are more inclined to support TRA. This effect holds across both White and racial minority respondents. Findings suggest that neoliberalism leads to greater support for TRA primarily within the context of evangelical Protestantism, thereby helping account for growing enthusiasm toward TRA among conservative Protestants.
AndrianC.SmithJ. (2006). Political democracy, trust, and social justice: A comparative overview. Lebanon, NH: Northeastern University Press.
3.
BaderC.MenckenF.FroeseP. (2007). American piety 2005: Content, methods and selected results from the Baylor Religion Survey. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 46, 447-463.
4.
BarnR. (2013). “Doing the right thing”: Transracial adoption in the USA. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 36, 1273-1291.
5.
BarthR. P.LeeC. K.WildfireJ.GuoS. (2006). A comparison of the governmental costs of long-term foster care and adoption. Social Service Review, 80, 127-158.
6.
BartholetE. (1991). Where do Black children belong? The politics of race matching in adoption. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 139, 1163-1256.
7.
BartholetE. (1995). Race separatism in the family: More on the transracial adoption debate. Duke Journal of Gender Law & Policy, 2, 99-105.
8.
BartholetE. (1999). Nobody’s children: Abuse and neglect, foster drift, and the adoption alternative. Boston, MA: Beacon.
9.
BriggsL. (2012). Somebody’s children: The politics of transracial and transnational adoption. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
CruverD. (2011). Reclaiming adoption: Missional living through the rediscovery of Abba Father. Adelphi, PA: Cruciform Press.
12.
EmersonM. O.SmithC. (2000). Divided by faith: Evangelical religion and the problem of race in America. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
13.
EmersonM. O.SmithC.SikkinkD. (1999). Equal in Christ, but not in the world: White conservative Protestants and explanations of Black-White inequality. Social Problems, 46, 398-417.
FeigelmanW.SilvermanA. R. (1984). The long-term effects of transracial adoption. Social Service Review, 58, 588-602.
20.
FensterJ. (2003). Race, religion, altruism, and the transracial adoption debate: A survey of Catholic, Protestant, and Jewish social workers. Social Thought, 22, 45-61.
21.
FisherA. P. (2003). “Not quite as good as having your own”? Toward a sociology of adoption. Annual Review of Sociology, 29, 335-361.
22.
GaertnerS. L.DovidioJ. F. (2000). Reducing intergroup bias: The Common Ingroup Identity Model. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
23.
GorskiP. (2009). Conservative Protestantism in the United States: Toward a comparative historical perspective. In BrintS.SchroedelJ. R. (Eds.), Evangelicals and democracy in America (Vol. 1, pp. 74-114). New York, NY: Russell Sage.
24.
GreenJ. C. (2009). Exploring the traditionalist alliance: Evangelical Protestants, religious voters, and the Republican presidential vote. In BrintS.SchroedelJ. R. (Eds.), Evangelicals and democracy in America (Vol. 1, pp. 117-158). New York, NY: Russell Sage.
25.
GrossN.MedvetzT.RussellR. (2011). The contemporary American conservative movement. Annual Review of Sociology, 37, 325-354.
26.
HackworthJ. (2012). Faith based: Religious neoliberalism and the politics of welfare in the United States. Athens: University of Georgia Press.
27.
HermanE. (2008). Kinship by design: A history of adoption in the United States. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
28.
HollingsworthL. D. (2002). Transracial adoptees in the media: 1986-1996. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 72, 289-293.
29.
JacobsonC. K.NielsenL.HardemanA. (2012). Family trends and transracial adoption in the United States. Adoption Quarterly, 15, 73-87.
30.
JonesJ. (2009). Who adopts? Characteristics of men and women who have adopted children. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db12.pdf
31.
JoyceK. (2013). The child catchers: Rescue, trafficking, and the New Gospel of Adoption. New York, NY: Public Affairs.
32.
KennedyR. (2003). Interracial intimacies: Sex, marriage, identity, and adoption. New York, NY: Pantheon Books.
33.
MeridaT.MortonR. (2011). Orphanology: Awakening to gospel-centered adoption and orphan care. Birmingham, AL: New Hope.
34.
MooreR. D. (2009). Adopted for life: The priority of adoption for Christian families and churches. Wheaton, IL: Crossway.
35.
National Association of Black Social Workers. (1972). Position paper: Transracial adoption. New York, NY: Author.
36.
OrtizA. T.BriggsL. (2000). The culture of poverty, crack babies, and welfare cheats: The making of the “healthy White baby crisis.”Social Text, 21, 39-57.
37.
PattonS. (2000). Birthmarks: Transracial adoption in contemporary America. New York: New York University Press.
38.
PerryP. (2005). Environmental attitudes and neo-liberal beliefs. Otemon Journal of Australian Studies, 31, 159-191.
39.
PerryS. L. (2010). The effects of race, religion, and religiosity on attitudes toward transracial adoption. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 41, 837-854.
40.
PerryS. L. (2011). Contact, congregations, and children of color: The effects of interracial contact in religious settings on Whites’ attitudes toward transracial adoption. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 42, 851-869.
41.
PerryS. L. (2014). Conservative Christians and support for transracial adoption as an alternative to abortion. Social Science Quarterly, 95, 380-392.
42.
PrasadM. (2006). The politics of free markets: The rise of neoliberal economic policies in Britain, France, Germany, and the United States. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
43.
QuirozP. A. (2007). Adoption in a color-blind society. New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield.
44.
SamuelsG. M. (2009). “Being raised by White people”: Navigating racial difference among adopted multiracial adults. Journal of Marriage and Family, 71, 80-94.
45.
SilvermanA. R. (1993). Outcomes of transracial adoption. Future of Children, 3, 104-118.
46.
SilvermanA. R.FeigelmanW. (1981). The adjustment of Black children adopted by White families. Social Casework, 62, 529-536.
47.
SimonR. J.AltsteinH. (1992). Adoption, race, and identity: From infancy through adolescence. New York, NY: Praeger.
48.
SmithD.JacobsonC. K.JuarezB. G. (2011). White parents, Black children: Experiencing transracial adoption. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
49.
SmolinD. M. (2012). Of orphans and adoption, parents and the poor, exploitation and rescue: A scriptural critique of the evangelical Christian adoption and orphan care movement. Regent Journal of International Law, 8, 267-324.
50.
SolingerR. (2001). Beggars and choosers: How the politics of choice shapes adoption, abortion, and welfare in the United States. New York, NY: Hill & Wang.
51.
WacquantL. (2009). Punishing the poor: The neoliberal government of social insecurity. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
52.
WhiteheadA. L.PerryS. L. (2014). Religion and support for adoption by same-sex couples: The relative effects of religious tradition, practices, and beliefs. Journal of Family Issues, doi: 10.1177/0192513X14536564
