Name ______________________________ Date____________________________
Psych 441-01_Spring 2020
Article Review Assignment: Article Notes Template Please summarize the articles relying on this
format.
.
I.
Article Title/Authors/Journal Title/Year of Publication
II.
Article Constructs/Key Terms/Keywords (You should also note any theory guiding the study
from the overview and can note or discuss prior research as well.)
III.
Research Hypothesis and/or Research Questions You can comment on the variables and how
these are defined and any notes on how they will be measured? (Adapt to focus on areas of
inquiry and investigation if you are reviewing a qualitative study or a study that is more
theoretical.)
IV.
Design and Method (You should select examples if there are several instruments and methods.)
i.
Participants/Sample Composition and Size (Any recruitment or sampling strategies or
methods)
ii.
Procedures/Measures/Apparatus/Instruments (Examples)
iii.
Analyses
V.
Sample of the Results/Findings
VI.
VII.
Discussion: Summary/Implications. Include your thoughts and any critiques of the article.
References (Here you should note the scope, in terms of overall list of references; you do not
need to list all of the references).
Please add any notes or comments about the article’s relevance to your literature review paper.
Anthony G. James Miami University
Stephanie Irby Coard and Mark A. Fine
Duane Rudy
University of North Carolina at Greensboro
University of Missouri
The Central Roles of Race and Racism in Reframing
Family Systems Theory: A Consideration of Choice
and Time
This article explores the central roles in family
research and practice of race and racism in
the reframing of family systems theory (FST)
when applied to Black and/or African American families. Specifically, we discuss how
current concepts of FST allow for an understanding of racial and ethnic socialization in
the parent–child familial subsystem. We then
theorize the potential reframing of FST to better
accommodate race, ethnicity, and racism, and
suggest an expansion of the theory by including
the components of historical time and choice. We
conclude with a brief discussion of the practical
implications of our suggested expansion.
The field of family science has several theories
and frameworks to guide scholars and practitioners who work with families. The goal of this
article is to reframe how family systems theory
(FST) can be used to better understand and
conduct family research and practice, with race,
ethnicity, and racism as central components.
More specifically, how do race, ethnicity, and
Department of Family Science and Social Work, Miami
University, 110B McGuffey Hall, 210 E. Spring Street,
Oxford, OH, 45056 (anthony.g.james@miamioh.edu).
Key Words: African American, Black families, family systems
theory, race, racial socialization, racism.
racism interface with FST given the theory’s
existing assumptions and concepts? Our rationale for focusing on FST is threefold. First, FST
emphasizes both family structure and process,
which sheds light on the varied ways that families can be organized and the manner in which
their members interact with one another. That
diversity lends support to the long-standing
plea to not view Black families as a monolithic
group. Second, FST is broad enough to serve as
a foundation for both research and practice, as
it is relevant to both research on Black families
and applied efforts with families (e.g., therapy;
Kerr, 2002). Third, because of its breadth, FST
has relevance across multiple disciplines (e.g.,
social work, family science, family psychology,
family medicine; Kazak, Segal-Andrews, &
Johnson, 1995; Payne, 2015). Thus, we argue
that FST, strengthened by a consideration of
historical time and choice, could have significant implications for the well-being and healthy
functioning of Black families.
A critical question that an astute reader may
ask is why a universal theory such as FST needs
to consider race and racism when thinking about,
or engaging in practice with, families. Primarily, our rationale is that the theory focuses on
processes explaining why families engage in
patterns of interaction. A decontextualized FST
approach would ignore the elephant in the room
Journal of Family Theory & Review 10 (June 2018): 419–433
DOI:10.1111/jftr.12262
419
420
Journal of Family Theory & Review
(i.e., race and racism) that often serves as a catalyst for culturally sanctioned parenting practices and parent–child interactions within Black
families. The racial identity of families (level
of racial consciousness of the family unit) and
of its members (e.g., parents, extended family)
drives the need to engage in practices to help
children develop in a racialized society. Turning
a blind eye to racism or how a color-blind ideology may affect some Black families would prevent scholars and practitioners from completely
understanding reasons that some Black families
tend to be structured the way they are and reasons they engage in certain patterns of behaviors.
For instance, the acceptance of color-blind ideologies has been linked to lower cognitive performance among ethnic minorities in interracial
interactions (Holoien & Shelton, 2012). These
patterns are central to strengthening Black families and the processes that shape family goals
(e.g., protecting the physical, psychological, and
emotional health of the child) and are based
clearly on inputs from the external environment
(e.g., being embedded in a racialized society).
Thus, if FST is to fully explain structure and process across all family ties, inclusive of racially
and ethnically diverse families, we argue that
it is critical to consider the concepts of historical time and choice. Doing so would allow FST
to better capture the culturally relevant complexities and existing strengths of Black families often exhibited through their organizational
structure and interactive processes.
In this article, we provide conceptualizations of race, ethnicity, and racism and discuss
how these constructs can be purposely and
strategically incorporated into FST to enhance
understanding of the particular area of racial
and ethnic socialization (RES). We then follow
this discussion with suggestions for how FST
can be extended by considering two additional
concepts (historical time and choice) to better
inform research and practice with families of
color, particularly Black families.
Family Systems Theory and Racial
and Ethnic Socialization
Although FST scholars acknowledge that family systems are influenced by societal-level factors, there have been few attempts to specifically
address how race, ethnicity, and racism affect the
ways that FST can be used to help understand
family dynamics and outcomes. In this section,
we critically review research on racial and ethnic
socialization (RES) in an effort to better understand families of color, although we primarily focus on African American families in this
article.
Conceptualizing Race, Ethnicity, and Racism
Although definitions of race and ethnicity differ, our usage of these terms varies according to
how they are used in the articles we cite and the
context in which the term is used. In this article, we use the term race (e.g., Black) to refer to
socially constructed categories that are assigned
to individuals on the basis of physical characteristics, with race frequently denoted by physical
skin color (Winker, 2004). We use the term ethnicity (e.g., African American) to refer to groups
of individuals who have a common origin and
culture. Thus, individuals of the same race (e.g.,
Black) may have different ethnicities (e.g., individuals born and raised in the Caribbean vs. individuals born and raised in Ethiopia). Finally, the
term racism refers to acts and ideas that serve
to disadvantage one group relative to another on
the basis of race. Racism may occur at an institutional level (e.g., unequal access to high-quality
education) or a personal level (e.g., one individual being suspicious of or avoiding another person on the basis of his or her skin color). Racism
may also include acts of commission (e.g., police
brutality) as well as acts of omission (e.g., failure to provide adequate medical facilities in primarily African American neighborhoods; Jones,
2000).
A particular area of family research in which
the study of race, ethnicity, and racism has been
evident is parenting. Although parenting can be
challenging for all families, Black families confront particular challenges while raising children
in a racially conscious society (Coard & Sellers, 2005). RES is a specific type of socialization utilized by families of color in response
to the challenges associated with the sociohistorical landscape, the persistence of racism,
and living in a racialized society that has historically not valued their existence. Because
of these unique challenges, socializing children to live in a racist society is perhaps the
most important aspect of parenting children
of color. We argue that RES is arguably the
most salient family process in African American families that FST needs to understand and
explain.
Race, Racism, and Family Systems Theory
While many researchers who study parenting
do not explicitly state that they are using a FST
perspective to theoretically ground their work,
others (e.g., McHale et al., 2006) have explicitly used an FST approach. Specifically, McHale
et al. (2006) noted that RES can be a coparenting
process, and one that occurs across subsystems
(i.e., parental subsystem and parent–child subsystems). We argue that the study of RES and
the processes that families engage in to function in a racially structured society are within the
bounds of FST. We base this argument on the
fact that parent–child interactions and parental
socialization of children are embedded in family systems. In the following section, we provide
a description of RES and a brief overview of
literature relevant to the parental socialization
of African American children, and we discuss
how key components of FST (i.e., goals, rules,
change, inputs) are present in these socialization
processes in African American families.
Contextualizing RES in a FST Framework
RES refers to the messages parents transmit to their children about the meaning and
significance of their racial or ethnic group
identity, racial stratification, and inter- and
intragroup relations (Hughes & Chen, 1997;
Lesane-Brown, 2006; Priest et al., 2014;
Reynolds & Gonzales-Backen, 2017). For
example, Peters (2002) explained that “the tasks
Black parents share with all parents—providing
for and raising children—not only are performed
within the mundane extreme environmental
stress of racism but include the responsibility
of raising physically and emotionally healthy
children who are Black in a society in which
being Black has negative connotations” (p. 59).
Inherent in this process is FST’s component of
family goals, in this case Black parents’ goal
that their children learn strategies to live in a
racist and racially structured society. Scholars examining the processes involved in RES
concur that societal oppression makes this
process essential for the optimal development
of Black and African American children (e.g.,
Boykin & Toms, 1985; Coard & Sellers, 2005;
Golash-Boza, 2016; Hughes et al., 2006).
The early “triple quandary” work of Boykin
and Toms (1985) provided the foundation for
the emergence of RES research. They explained
that RES involves the transmission of messages
to children that will equip them with the skills
421
to successfully navigate three separate cultural experiences—mainstream, minority, and
African American culture. They posited that
each of these three realities requires youth to
develop specific knowledge within each status
to be successful as well as psychologically and
emotionally healthy. The mainstream reality
requires an adaptation to “White middle-class
standards” (Boykin & Toms, 1985). Such standards are necessary for navigating the school
context and future employment opportunities. Understanding the effects of their status
requires knowledge of how African Americans are socially and historically positioned
in society. Minority status considers the historical enslavement and subsequent societal
oppression of African Americans. As a result,
navigating this status requires unique skills for
coping with societal racism and discrimination
(Phenice & Griffore, 2000). For many African
Americans, maintaining a sense of self-worth
and dignity is an essential factor in the process
of freely engaging in their own unique cultural
expression. African Americans’ RES requires
developmentally appropriate guidance and
instruction for navigating each of these cultural
experiences (e.g., cultural pride, preparation for
bias; Coard & Sellers, 2005).
Tenets of racial socialization. Although more
recent RES research has addressed how these
processes unfold in other ethnic-racial minority families (e.g., Native American, European
American, immigrant Latino; Hughes & Chen,
1997; Hughes, Witherspoon, Rivas-Drake,
& West-bey, 2009; Tynes, 2007), how these
processes work in African American families
has been studied more extensively (Boykin &
Toms, 1985; Edwards & Few-Demo, 2016;
Lesane-Brown, 2006). The tenets described
here are based on the preponderance of RES
research focused on African American youth
and families.
In a review of racial socialization research,
Hughes et al. (2006) identified the four most
frequently utilized tenets of RES as “cultural
socialization, preparation for bias, promotion
of mistrust, and egalitarianism” (p. 748). The
authors asserted that although scholars adapt
different terms to describe these processes,
they generally identify similar tenets to explain
racial socialization. Furthermore, these scholars
acknowledged that there is overlap between the
racial socialization literature, which focuses
422
primarily on African American family processes, and the ethnic socialization literature,
which emphasizes the family processes characteristic of ethnic immigrants (e.g., Latino
families) as well as African Americans. These
RES processes align with the FST components
of family rules and change. The notion of family
rules is present not in the sense of intrasystem
interactions but in the sense that it involves parents engaging in the process of socializing their
children to rules in the external world that result
from the presence of racist ideologies and structures (Golash-Boza, 2016). Further, because
race and racism are dynamic concepts, RES
involves parents needing to continually monitor changes in the ways that racism manifests
itself to alter their socialization practices. As an
example of how changing laws and social norms
need to be continually monitored by parents,
despite the fact that interracial relationships are
typically legal, there still remains a range of
subtle and not-so-subtle ways in which such
relationships are frowned on and discriminated
against in America. As a result, despite legal
changes, parents must still prepare their children
for entering into such relationships and attempt
to protect them from their potentially negative
effects; Tillman & Miller, 2017). Change in
these socialization practices enables parents to
continually, and effectively, equip their children with the ability to successfully navigate
continually modified racial barriers.
Cultural socialization. Cultural socialization
has been identified as the most frequently used
method of RES, and it is often referred to as
racial pride (Hughes et al., 2006). For families
of color, socializing their children to understand,
and be proud of, their ethnic minority culture
is a family goal, and family goals, whether
implicitly or explicitly stated, are considered
in FST to influence both family processes and
structures (Whitchurch & Constantine, 2009).
The primary goal of cultural socialization is for
African American parents to provide positive
representations of African American culture
and teaching children about their cultural and
racial “heritage, history, customs and traditions” (Hughes et al., 2006, p. 749). Families
engage in the process of cultural socialization
through daily interactions, discussions, and
practices that provide positive representations
of African American culture. This includes
talking about significant contributions African
Journal of Family Theory & Review
Americans have made, enjoying ethnic foods,
and exposing youth to “culturally relevant
books, artifacts, music, and stories” (Hughes
et al., 2006, p. 749). According to Boykin and
Toms (1985), this method of racial socialization
is geared toward preparing African American
youth to navigate African American culture.
Preparation for bias. The preparation-for-bias
tenet is characterized by parental transmission
of messages that prepare youth for their minority status (Hughes et al., 2006). Such messages
communicate an understanding of societal
perceptions of African Americans. From an
FST perspective, this process is essential for
African American families because parents
realize there are rules that place their children
of color in harm’s way. More specifically, the
rules exist because of the ubiquitous racism in
society (Golash-Boza, 2016). Parents engaging
in preparation for bias may tell their children
that they have to be twice as good as their European American peers to be considered equal to
them (Coard, Wallace, Stevenson, & Brotman,
2004). In addition, this tenet also prepares youth
for the inequitable treatment they will receive.
For example, parents of an African American
male may prepare him for police racial profiling
through a process by which they equip him
with knowledge of how to ensure that he is
not perceived as hostile. This preparation is
done to protect youth from oppressive societal
consequences such as being detained by law
enforcement or worse (e.g., death, murder).
Promotion of mistrust. The promotion-ofmistrust tenet is described as messages that
encourage Black youth to be cautious in White
contexts and in interactions with White people
(Hughes et al., 2006) and a socialization method
through which families “emphasize the need for
wariness and distrust in interracial interactions”
(Hughes et al., 2006, p. 757). This strategy is
used primarily by parents who have experienced
adverse interracial interactions, which they try
to prevent their children from experiencing.
Similarly, it is also another goal-oriented process to help protect children from experiencing
potentially fatal interactions with racist individuals. An example of how this process can
be found is in the children’s book Ruth and the
Green Book (Ramsey & Strauss, 2010). Ruth
detailed her African American family’s travels
and how when they needed a food or restroom
Race, Racism, and Family Systems Theory
break, there were hidden rules that regulated
where they could eat or relieve themselves. Her
mother shared with her a “green book” that
explained these rules to help protect families
like Ruth’s. Although the story is fictional, the
“green book” itself is an actual text (Green,
1936) that many African American families
routinely used to assist them in making travel
decisions that kept (keep) them safe, and alive.
Egalitarianism. Egalitarianism
refers
to
messages that encourage youth to value individualized qualities and equality (Thornton,
Chatters, Taylor, & Allen, 1990). Hughes et al.
(2006) described the egalitarian method of racial
socialization as a process through which African
American parents foster the skills that African
American students need to develop to excel
in mainstream society. This process happens
in families via parents communicating to their
children the importance of “hard work, virtue,
self-acceptance, and equality” (Hughes et al.,
2006, p. 757), which they then use outside the
family in their various life pursuits. It stresses
the fact that African American students are
equal to other racial groups and encourages
peaceful coexistence (Coard et al., 2004). The
process reflects the FST concept of output, or
what families provide to the external world.
Research indicates that African American families engage in racial socialization strategies that
either combine methods or use them in isolation
(Hughes et al., 2006).
The process of racial socialization among
African American families is important to understand for several reasons. First, empirical studies
document its influential role in determining psychological, educational, behavioral, and social
outcomes for African American youth (Banerjee, Harrell, & Johnson, 2011; Bennett, 2006),
such as positive identity development (Barr &
Neville, 2008), increased self-esteem (Neblett
et al., 2008), better academic adjustment (Banerjee et al., 2011), and a buffer against harmful
effects of racism (Brown & Tylka, 2011) and
racial discrimination (Neblett et al., 2008).
Second, racial socialization influences
youths’ beliefs and attitudes about the way
the world works and informs their perceptions
of self and helps to shape their strategies and
skills for coping with racism and navigating race-related social interactions (Coard &
Sellers, 2005). In short, as is consistent with
FST, the family is a primary context for youth
423
identity, socialization, and discrimination experiences. Youth explore, construct, display, and
reconstruct their ethnic and racial identities
within family settings (Awokoya, 2012). They
receive a multitude of RES messages from
family members and through family practices,
such as family communication about racial
discrimination (Hughes et al., 2006; Juang &
Syed, 2014). This ongoing dynamic systemic
interplay between the external environmental
systems and internal family responses via RES
processes that equip youth with the ability to
comfortably and competently move between the
multiple cultural milieus they have to navigate
(otherwise known as code switching; Morton,
2014) evidences automata within the family that
are centered by race and racism.
Ecological characteristics of RES. The ecological characteristics of RES reflect the FST concepts of inputs and feedback loops. The external
environment transmits information to the family
that serves as a warning signal to parents regarding how much or how little RES is needed to help
promote the healthy development of their children and youth. Thus, parents receive feedback
from their children and their environments to
determine whether to continue socializing their
children as they have been or whether some
change is necessary, a reflection of automatic
family and environment dynamics that directly
relate to Black and African American families’
being embedded in a racialized society.
The parent–child relationship literature, particularly that related to the RES of children, is a
prime example of how FST can be used to center
the analysis of how race and racism in family life
have an impact on family processes. Specifically,
when considering the FST concepts of family
rules, goals, change, and outputs or inputs, FST
can accommodate how racial and ethnic minority families adapt to rearing children in a racist
environment that does not always value them or
their contributions to society. However, the current construction of FST is limited in its ability to
explain why families engage in certain patterns
of interaction or organize in the way they do.
Extensions to FST: Historical Time
and Choice
In the spirit of Golash-Boza’s (2016) statement
that “theoretical knowledge undergirds empirical work and it helps us to know which questions to ask and how to interpret our findings”
424
Journal of Family Theory & Review
(p. 130), we propose revising FST to include
two concepts that better inform research on, and
the understanding of, the effects that race and
racism have on family systems. Historical time
and choice push against the current boundaries
of FST, yet they universally have an impact on
family systems and are strongly influenced by
race and racism. We extend FST by discussing
how these concepts are central to both the structure and process of family life.
Historical Time
Current components of FST are not completely
absent of the notion of time. One component
of FST in which temporality is central, albeit
implicitly, is feedback loops. Time is central
because time must pass for the cycles of feedback loops, which result in family change, to
occur. A family system puts out information
(i.e., outputs), it receives some sort of feedback
(positive or negative) in return, and the family
adjusts to that feedback, which leads to subsequent outputs. This dynamic system of feedback
loops is continuous and must include temporal
time. However, the notion of time experienced
in dynamic systems feedback loops is different
from the notion of historical time and how that
affects family systems.
We refer to time in a historical or temporal
sense, specifically in that systems are historically contextualized in both the broader system
in which they are embedded and the history of
the system itself and its subcomponent history
(Riegel, 1975). From this perspective, temporal change in a system is embedded not only
in its own historical experiences but also in the
broader societal structures in which the family
is situated. Additionally, because systems have
some level of agency, they can adapt in ways that
change the process or organization of the system (Ford & Lerner, 1992). This type of change
is what Lerner (1984) referred to as plasticity.
Although he was referring to the human organism in a relationally systemic way, the same concept holds for viewing family systems regarding how history (e.g., personal, cultural) affects
factors such as family organization (structure)
or patterns of interaction (process), both among
members and with external entities.
Additional support for the inclusion of historical time as a concept in FST pertains to
the fact that the structures of race and racism
also change over time. As explained earlier,
the structures typically change to fit the needs
and interests of those in power across historical periods (Golash-Boza, 2016; Marx & Engels,
1970). Thus, our theories must be able to adapt
to these changing ideologies, especially in how
they directly influence family systems.
Historical time allows for FST to conceptually incorporate empirical data regarding how
race and racism have an impact on the social
locations of family systems in contemporary
times. We suggest that policy decisions over the
course of history, rooted in the structures of race
and racism, affect contemporary family life. In
these examples, the structures of race and racism
influence the structure and patterns of interactions of contemporary families.
Family structure and race. Including historical
time into FST can also explain contemporary
structures of African American families and
how those structures have shifted as a result of
their being embedded in a racialized society.
For instance, near the end of the 19th century,
80% of African American families were headed
by two-parent families. This figure dropped to
64% by 1970, and today it is less than 40%
(Pew Research Center, 2015). The same Pew
study found that African American families
have the lowest percentage of two-parent family
households when compared across ethnoracial
groups. What explains this difference? Several
decades ago, Billingsley (1968) suggested that
economic factors were the main drivers of this
change in family life among African American
families. He hones in on economic decisions
in the mid-20th century that provided vast
economic opportunities for European American
families while simultaneously stripping away
those opportunities for working members of
African American families (e.g., providing
government contracts to European American
families and businesses while restricting the
same contracts from African American families
and businesses; Feagin, 2014).
Although economic policies may not necessarily explicitly favor one ethnic or racial
group over another, when the policies are carried out in practice (e.g., usually by European
American program administrators), they have
overwhelmingly favored European American
families and disadvantaged African American
families (Katznelson, 2005). Although Katznelson (2005) focused primarily on federal New
Deal programs and policy, economic policies
Race, Racism, and Family Systems Theory
at the local level also favored the majority
group while disadvantaging African American
families (e.g., Lipman, 2013; Mayorga-Gallo,
2014; Saito, 2009; Zhang, 2011). When considering that having stable work and income
are two critical determinants of whether people
enter into marriages and whether their marriages remain intact (Edin & Kefalas, 2011;
Gibson-Davis, Edin, & McLanahan, 2005;
Smock, Manning, & Porter, 2005), such racist
economic policy decisions shift opportunity
to those at the top of the racial hierarchy and
partially explain historically drastic changes
in the structure of families (i.e., a nearly 50%
shift from two-parent to single-parent families
over the course of 100 years). Such changes
in structure are certain to affect processes and
interactions within the family system.
Another policy-based historical factor that
has been linked to the contemporary structure
of African American families is mass incarceration. The current relatively high number of
single-parent families (typically single mothers)
and the increase in grandparent-headed families
(Baker, Silverstein, & Putney, 2008; Turney,
2014) have been fueled by mass incarceration
policies. Scholars have found that the disproportionate rate of mass incarceration of Black
men and women has affected the structure of
African American families (e.g., distorted marriage markets, removed working men from the
home; Alexander, 2012; Raley, 1996; Western
& Pettit, 2010). Specifically, law enforcement
policies (e.g., drug sentencing guidelines,
stop-and-frisk policing, law-and-order movement, government-supported prison-industrial
complex) over the past 50 years have undergirded the exponential growth in the prison
population, which consists of a disproportionate number of African American men
and women. We are not arguing that each of
those single-parent families desires a nuclear
two-parent structure; rather, we are arguing that
the trend that saw the emergence of a majority
single-parent structure (from a historical majority of a two-parent structure) among African
American families is traceable to historical
policy changes.
Part of the value of FST is its ability to explain
how dynamic systems emerge, are structured,
or make alterations to adjust for perturbations
(Dent & Umpleby, 1998). However, FST has not
typically considered historical markers as key
determinants of emergence and/or organization.
425
We propose using historical context as a key
factor for explaining change in family structures.
Specifically, we argue that social and economic
policies have direct implications for how African
American families are currently organized and
the emergence of a different majority structure
(e.g., primarily two parent to primarily single
parent).
Marital
subsystems
and
parent–child
subsystems. Our discussion of how history
influences family interactions, when FST centers race, focuses on two areas of family systems:
the marital subsystem and the parent–child subsystem(s). Although these two particular areas
of family systems are not exhaustive of all
systems across African American families, they
have received substantial scholarly attention and
provide opportunities to discuss limitations of
FST for understanding African American family
systems when centering race (Boyd-Franklin,
2013; Cabrera, Fagan, Wight, & Schadler, 2011;
Kelly, Maynigo, Wesley, & Durham, 2013).
With respect to the marital subsystem, families of color have external experiences that
spillover into their family life. Specifically,
for African American couples, their personal
histories of ethnoracial discrimination are linked
to lower marital satisfaction (Lincoln & Chae,
2010; Murry, Brown, Brody, Cutrona, & Simons,
2001; Taylor, 1990). Murry et al. (2001) found
that increased incidences of discrimination were
linked to higher levels of psychological distress
for married African American women, which
resulted in poor-quality intimate relations with
their spouses. Lincoln and Chae (2010) found
that personal histories of discrimination had negative spillover effects on psychosocial health and
marital satisfaction for both members of the couple. These personal discriminatory experiences
produce stressors that may exceed the coping
resources of the relationship, contribute to the
higher divorce rate among African American
families, and partially explain the comparably
lower divorce rate among European Americans,
especially when considering that they are in the
more privileged ethnoracial group (James &
Fine, 2013). Most couples experience tensions
and strains in their intimate relationships; however, we argue that discriminatory race-based
experience becomes a key compounding effect
for ethnic minority couples by adding to the
already-distressing experiences that commonly
occur in intimate relationships. Racism can have
426
a debilitating effect on relationships (Williams,
1999), particularly when there is a lack of ethnic
pride or internalized racism (Taylor, 1990; Trail,
Goff, Bradbury, & Karney, 2012) or simply a
lack of tools to buffer the negative effects of
discriminatory experiences. Considering that
marital satisfaction can also be a protective factor against discriminatory experiences for ethnic
minority couples (Lincoln & Chae, 2010; Trail
et al., 2012), how partners interact with each
other as a result of these race-based experiences
can be either a protective or debilitating factor
that contributes to processes that may strengthen
or weaken the foundation of the relationship.
With respect to the parent–child subsystem,
personal histories have an important place in
influencing parenting (and RES) in African
American families. Parents’ personal history
with racist experiences and continual racist
inputs from the external environment impel
them to engage in the RES of their own children. For example, their personal histories
with racism may influence a desire to protect
or shield their children or prepare them from
those same experiences (Hughes et al., 2006)
by engaging in a process of preparing for bias
and building racial pride. For instance, racial
pride can help children internalize value for
their culture because they are likely to have
experiences in their world that discount or
dehumanize that culture or skin color. As such,
parents often engage in practices to help build
up the confidence or self-esteem of their ethnic
minority children well before the children have
direct experiences with racism of their own, or
at least before children are able to understand
the experience of racism. Thus, the process of
engaging in RES is based on the history of the
parents, who have developed in a racialized
milieu. Without the incorporation of history as
a component of FST, the theory is limited to
explanations of the behavior without context,
which places limits on the ability to acquire
a complete understanding of the particular
parenting processes.
Policy and family systems. The second way
that historical time influences family systems
is through policy. The history of redlining
directly affects the current racial wealth disparities, which indicate that the average European
American family has 13 times the wealth of
the average African American family (Pew
Research Center, 2016; Williams & Collins,
Journal of Family Theory & Review
2001). Squires (1992) defined redlining as “a
process by which goods or services are made
unavailable, or are available only on less than
favorable terms, to people because of where
they live regardless of their relevant objective
characteristics” (p. 2). When the U.S. Federal
Housing Authority shifted its policies to allow
more Americans to secure loans to purchase
homes, decisions regarding provision of a loan
and/or its terms were made by banks and loan
officers on the basis of an evaluation of the property. In the first half of the 20th century, homes
and properties sought by African American
families were “redlined” such that loans were
denied or provided on substandard terms (e.g.,
high interest rates), whereas homes and land
sought by many European American families
were “greenlined” (i.e., favorable evaluations
that resulted in provision of loans and favorable loan terms; Woods, 2012). To be sure,
the color-coding system had other categories
that further segmented groups subsumed by the
European American moniker, based primarily
on their perceived desirability. For instance,
Protestant English, Scottish, and German Americans were coded as “green” or “most desirable,”
but Jewish, Irish, and Italian Americans were
coded as “less desirable” or “blue,” with a
“yellow” or “undesirable” classification that
intersected class and race and was constructed
mostly of working class European American
families (see Hoyt, 1933, for the full coding
structure). This process enabled many European
American families to secure houses and build
equity (i.e., wealth) over time. Thus, future
generations were able to secure inheritances
that gave them a start to life that was far better
than families who were not able to bequeath
such gifts to future generations (Conley, 1999).
Further, when considering that wealth provides
security against life experiences that negatively
affect well-being, material wealth also provides
families with economic flexibility to engage in
activities that positively affect the well-being of
family members (Eid & Larsen, 2008; Oliver &
Shapiro, 2006).
We argue that as it is currently constructed,
FST does not allow for a component of history
to be considered in how families are structured
or their contemporary patterns of interaction.
However, race serves as a regulator of opportunity for families, particularly in how they have
organized themselves over time. Specifically,
African American families have traditionally
Race, Racism, and Family Systems Theory
had less access to resources and opportunities.
This access to resources provides vastly different
opportunities in family process (e.g., ability to
take regular family vacations, weekly meal dates
for couples, access to extracurricular educational
experiences for children, other leisure-time
activities; Dufur, Parcel, & Troutman, 2013; He
& Baker, 2005). Those historical policies that
shaped contemporary racial disparities, in conjunction with an economic system rigged along
racial lines (e.g., Darolia, Koedel, Martorell,
Wilson, & Perez-Arce, 2014; Karger, 2005),
have important implications for how contemporary African American families are structured
and have access to the needed resources that
increase well-being, particularly for Black
single mothers (Passias, Sayer, & Pepin, 2017).
Choice
FST can also be enhanced through incorporation of the concept of choice, particularly in
regard to how family systems self-organize or
emerge as a result of the family’s interactions
with the external environment. As previously
explained, FST derives from general systems
theory, which includes dynamic systems theory (Thelen & Smith, 1998). One component
of dynamic systems theory is the notion of
self-organization of biological organization.
Thelen and Smith (1998) noted that “pattern
and order emerge from the interactions of
the components of a complex system without
explicit instructions, either from the organism
itself or from the environment” (p. 259). Choice
regards whether families had a choice in their
organization (formation) and/or their patterns
of interactions within the family or with its
external environment. We disagree with Thelen
and Smith’s argument that systems emerge
without explicit instructions; rather, we agree
with Omi and Winant (2015), who argued that
“we make our racial identities, both individually
and collectively, but not under conditions of
our own choosing” (p. 153). Omi and Winant
(2015) further noted that conceptions of race are
formed and altered at the state and national level
of government (e.g., in the United States, the
Census creates ethnoracial categories into which
participants self-select). Such formal structures
provide mechanisms for internalizing beliefs
about racist ideology, which manifest in practice
and systemic inequality across social institutions, including in the family. Much evidence
427
shows that families have not always had agentic
choice in their formation or patterns of interaction, as we discuss later. In the remainder of this
section, we provide historical and contemporary
examples to support our argument that the concept of choice enhances FST’s ability to explain
how structures of race and racism impact family
life.
The history of the structure of race and racism
is such that state and local policies have resulted
in altering the organization of families and
their interactions, with affected families having
little choice in the matter. For instance, African
American slave families existed under the constant threat of spouses and/or children being sold
to other slave owners (Patterson, 1982). Because
African slaves brought to America were considered property and could be sold by their owners,
they did not have the choice of self-organization
of their families (i.e., any member of the family
system could be sold at the whim of the owner;
Williams, 2012). Their family systems were
organized on the basis of decisions by slave
owners who were more concerned with return
on investment than well-being of the families.
Thus, decisions such as who was bred to bring
about a profit were of more importance than
allowing African slaves to structure their own
families. Although some slave owners did allow
slave families some authority in structuring their
families, such decisions could change at any
moment. This was not a condition that many
European American families were subjected
to. From a family interaction perspective, King
(2011) detailed how a major goal for African
slaves with children was to teach their children
how to grow, develop, and survive in the confines
of slavery. If children were not socialized in this
way, they were at risk of being brutally whipped
or killed, similar to the contemporary processes of racial socialization explained earlier.
Examples of family life being limited by choice
are also relevant (e.g., perceptions of school
choice and career opportunities and barriers
to upward mobility; Djamba & Kimuna, 2012;
Fouad & Byars-Winston, 2005; Osamudia, n.d.).
Finally, policy decisions have historically
been made along racial lines (e.g., Bell, 2004;
Hoffer, 2012; Moran, 2003). This choice links
directly to racist structures and ideologies
regarding roles in the economic, political, and
social structure of the United States. In this
vein, a system view that is limited to (agentic) self-organization does not align with the
428
Journal of Family Theory & Review
empirical realities discussed earlier. We suggest adding the concept of choice (and lack
of choice) to FST to support how racist social
structures have provided some families with
the choice of family formation and interaction
while denying other families (i.e., those lower
on the racial hierarchy) the same. As noted
earlier, FST has traditionally focused on nuclear
families, consisting of parents and their biological children, with other individuals who are
influential to the family considered members
of extrafamilial systems. Our emphasis on
choice opens the door for family boundaries
to expand to include biologically related kin
(e.g., grandparents, cousins, uncles, aunts) and
non-biologically-related individuals (e.g., fictive
kin) who, if they play important roles, can be
conceptualized as within rather than without the
family system. African American families are
more likely than European American families to
choose to include non-biologically-related and
non-legally-connected individuals as members
of their families (Taylor, Chatters, & Woodward,
& Brown, 2013). Thus, especially when trying
to understand African American families, but
also all families, it is particularly important that
choice be given a more prominent place in the
tenets of FST.
Implications of Centering Race
and Racism in FST
The 2017 hurricanes that struck Texas, Florida,
Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands and
other states in their path illustrate the need for
incorporating historical time and choice into
FST. Without the inclusion of historical time
and choice, FST considers how families react
to these tragedies in a vacuum, not considering the larger context that influences family
processes and outcomes in response to material and other losses stemming from the hurricanes. For example, families of color, who often
have not had the choice to purchase and/or build
their houses in areas that are less vulnerable
to the effects of hurricanes, are disproportionately represented among those who lose their
homes and have to rebuild (Bullard & Wright,
2009). Further, historical time affects the process of adjusting to hurricanes, because past
events such as slavery, racial discrimination, and
housing segregation have created socioeconomic
structures that stratify vulnerable communities
along racial lines (Adeola & Picou, 2017), thus
disproportionately allowing racially and economically privileged families additional choices
in responding to impending weather tragedies
and/or in coping with them if they do occur.
Thus, historical time and choice add to the ability
of FST to help us understand how families adjust
to major climate events by examining how vulnerability to such events can be traceable along
intersecting lines of race and income (Misra,
2017).
Programming. Given the importance and frequency of RES among African American
families, it is important for scholars to give attention to RES in the development of interventions
designed for African American youth and families. Incorporating culturally relevant factors
such as RES may serve to increase parent participation and engagement in intervention programming, increase positive parenting practices,
and promote social, emotional, and behavioral
outcomes among children (Coard et al., 2004).
Current strategies to implement culturally relevant strategies have included the development
of parenting curricula and written materials.
Policy. The use of an FST lens, with the additions of historical time and choice, to examine
wealth disparities in the United States strengthens the call for reparations for African Americans (Coates, 2014) and redemptive housing
policies (Briggs, 2006). These disparities are
the result of the legacy of slavery, Jim Crow,
and continuing discrimination. There is precedent for the provision of reparations to ethnic
minority groups that were subject to racist policies and treatments (Yamamoto, 1998). The suggested reframing of FST so that it provides a
mechanism for addressing how historical policies are directly related to current disparities in
family well-being potentially supports the need
to redress the financial harm done to African
American families.
Parenting. Although all parents struggle with
the challenges of raising children, research
confirms that many African American parents’
parenting styles differ from those typically
used by European American parents (Miller
& Miller, 2009), particularly in terms of “no
nonsense parenting” (Brody & Flor, 1998) and
an increased prevalence of authoritarian parenting (Dornbusch, Ritter, Leiderman, Roberts, &
Fraleigh, 1987). These differences in parenting
Race, Racism, and Family Systems Theory
styles are partially attributed to cultural variations and unique historical experiences that
African American parents have faced (e.g.,
racism, prejudice, discrimination), as well as a
protective strategy to help prepare their children
for future experience with structures of racism.
While all African American parents may not
use the same parenting styles, the reality is
that today’s African American children are
exposed to substantial adversities at young ages,
a process that parents of European American
children have more choice about because of their
privilege in society. African American families
are, on average, poorer than their European
American counterparts; they face discrimination
and racism, both overt and subtle; and they
are judged by double standards (Anton, Jones,
& Youngstrom, 2015; Barajas-Gonzalez &
Brooks-Gunn, 2014; Verduzco-Baker, 2017).
They all too frequently must come of age in
unhealthy communities, with disinvested surroundings, increasing crime, and substandard
housing and substandard services. As a result,
African American parents are faced with the
formidable task of helping their youth interpret
information developed and delivered by a system
that historically has not had their best interest at
heart, and their youth are challenged with the
tasks of interpreting these messages during their
developmental years. Teaching youth how to
deal with being the target of prejudice, discrimination, and racism is a task that is viewed as
critical to healthy African American child developmental outcomes and positive parent–child
interactions.
Research. The additions of historical time
and choice to FST provide an opportunity for
research that informs the literature on understanding families of color. Future work can
examine how a race and racism-centered FST
lens might fit within or push against the boundaries of traditional FST. In this article, we
focused primarily on how race and racism have
an impact on family life in an African American family context. We encourage scholars to
expand on, or refute, our concepts by applying
them to family structures or processes of other
families, particularly those in other nations,
or even expanded discussion regarding other
family structures within the wide spectrum
of African American families (e.g., LGBTQ
families, single-father- or single-mother-headed
households).
429
Conclusion
Family systems theory has had a major influence on family research and practice. Its influence extends far beyond instances of researchers
and practitioners explicitly stating that they are
using FST to ground their work; in fact, some
of its main tenets, principles, assumptions, and
terms (e.g., boundaries, the whole is greater than
the sum of the parts, triangulation, hierarchy,
changes in one subsystem have reverberating
effects throughout the entire family system, bidirectional effects) have become so commonplace
that they are used without specifically connecting them to FST.
Nevertheless, despite the extensive influence
of FST, we have argued here that it can be
extended to give the key constructs of race and
racism a more central role in the theory. In particular, FST is often decontextualized and applied
as if all families had similar historical experiences and levels of choice in creating their families as they so choose. Thus, we believe that
FST can be strengthened by a thoughtful inclusion of historical time and choice as key factors to be considered when applying FST to
understanding and helping families. As an illustration of how considering historical time and
choice can enhance FST, we have provided an
in-depth analysis of RES and how our extended
version of FST can provide a nuanced understanding of how the process of RES is conducted within African American families. We
have also argued that it is important to consider
how historical time and choice influence how
African American parents engage in this important process. We hope that our initial foray into
reframing FST can help us understand aspects of
race and racism in addition to racial socialization in the future. Although we focus primarily
on African American family process and structures, we hope that our suggested reframing of
FST spurs additional theorizing to equip family science professionals with essential knowledge about the structure of and processes across
diverse families.
References
Adeola, F. O., & Picou, J. S. (2017). Hurricane
Katrina–linked environmental injustice: Race,
class, and place differentials in attitudes. Disasters, 41, 228–257. https://doi.org/10.1111/disa
.12204
430
Alexander, M. (2012). The new Jim Crow: Mass
incarceration in the age of colorblindness. New
York, NY: New Press.
Anton, M. T., Jones, D. J., & Youngstrom, E.
A. (2015). Socioeconomic status, parenting,
and externalizing problems in African American single-mother homes: A person-oriented
approach. Journal of Family Psychology, 29,
405–415. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000086
Awokoya, J. T. (2012). Identity constructions and
negotiations among 1.5- and second generation
Nigerians: The impact of family, school, and
peer contexts. Harvard Educational Review,
82, 255–281. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.82.2
.9v77p329367116vj
Baker, L. A., Silverstein, M., & Putney, N. M. (2008).
Grandparents raising grandchildren in the United
States: Changing family forms, stagnant social
policies. Journal of Societal & Social Policy, 7,
53–69.
Banerjee, M., Harrell, Z. T., & Johnson, D. J. (2011).
Racial/ethnic socialization and parental involvement in education as predictors of cognitive ability and achievement in African American children.
Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 40, 595–605.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-010-9559-9
Barajas-Gonzalez, R. G., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2014).
Income, neighborhood stressors, and harsh parenting: Test of moderation by ethnicity, age, and gender. Journal of Family Psychology, 28, 855–866.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038242
Barr, S. C., & Neville, H. A. (2008). Examination of
the link between parental racial socialization messages and racial ideology among Black college students. Journal of Black Psychology, 34, 131–155.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0095798408314138
Bell, D. (2004). Silent covenants: Brown v. Board
of Education and the unfulfilled hopes for racial
reform. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Bennett, M. D. (2006). Cultural resources and school
engagement among African American youths: The
role of racial socialization and ethnic identity. Children & Schools, 28, 197–206. https://doi.org/10
.1093/cs/28.4.197
Billingsley, A. (1968). Black families in White America. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Boyd-Franklin, N. (2013). Black families in therapy:
Understanding the African American experience.
London, England: Guilford.
Boykin, A. W., & Toms, F. (1985). Black child socialization: A conceptual framework. In H. McAdoo
& J. McAdoo (Eds.), Black children: Social, educational and parental environments (pp. 33–51).
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Briggs, X. D. S. (2006). The geography of opportunity: Race and housing choice in metropolitan
America. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution
Press.
Journal of Family Theory & Review
Brody, G. H., & Flor, D. L. (1998). Maternal
resources, parenting practices, and child competence in rural, single-parent African American
families. Child Development, 69, 803–816. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1998.tb06244.x
Brown, D. L., & Tylka, T. L. (2011). Racial discrimination and resilience in African American young
adults: Examining racial socialization as a moderator. Journal of Black Psychology, 37, 259–285.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0095798410390689
Bullard, R. D., & Wright, B. (2009). Race, place,
and environmental justice after Hurricane Katrina: Struggles to reclaim, rebuild, and revitalize
New Orleans and the Gulf Coast. Boulder, CO:
Westview Press.
Cabrera, N. J., Fagan, J., Wight, V., & Schadler, C.
(2011). Influence of mother, father, and child risk
on parenting and children’s cognitive and social
behaviors. Child Development, 82, 1985–2005.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01667
.x
Coard, S., & Sellers, R. (2005). African American
families as a context for racial socialization. In
V. C. McLoyd, N. E. Hill, & K. Dodge (Eds.),
African-American family life: Ecological and cultural diversity (pp. 264–284). New York, NY:
Guilford Press.
Coard, S. I., Wallace, S., Stevenson, H., & Brotman, L. (2004). Towards culturally competent preventive interventions: The consideration of racial
socialization in parent training with African American families. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 1, 277–293. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JCFS
.0000022035.07171.f8
Coates, T. (2014, June). The case for reparations.
Atlantic Monthly. Retrieved from https://www
.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/06/thecase-for-reparations/361631/
Conley, D. (1999). Being black, living in the red:
Race, wealth, and social policy in America. Los
Angeles, CA: University of California Press.
Darolia, R., Koedel, C., Martorell, P., Wilson, K.,
& Perez-Arce, F. (2016). Race and gender effects
on employer interest in job applicants: New evidence from a resume field experiment. Applied
Economics Letters, 23(12), 853–856. https://doi
.org/10.1080/13504851.2015.1114571
Dent, E. B., & Umpleby, S. A. (1998). Underlying
assumptions of several traditions in systems theory
and cybernetics. In R. Trappl (Ed.), Cybernetics
and Systems (pp. 513–518). Vienna, Austria: Austrian Society for Cybernetic Studies.
Djamba, Y. K., & Kimuna, S. R. (2012). The labor
force participation and earnings gap among
African immigrant women in the USA. Journal
of International Migration and Integration, 13,
481–501.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12134-0110218-0
Race, Racism, and Family Systems Theory
Dornbusch, S. M., Ritter, P. L., Leiderman, P. H.,
Roberts, D. F., & Fraleigh, M. J. (1987). The
relation of parenting style to adolescent school
performance. Child Development, 58, 1244–1257.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1130618
Dufur, M. J., Parcel, T. L., & Troutman, K. P. (2013).
Does capital at home matter more than capital at
school? Social capital effects on academic achievement. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 31, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rssm.2012
.08.002
Edin, K., & Kefalas, M. (2011). Promises I can
keep: Why poor women put motherhood before
marriage. Berkeley, CA: University of California
Press.
Edwards, A. L., & Few-Demo, A. L. (2016). African
American maternal power and the racial socialization of preschool children. Sex Roles, 75, 56–70.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-016-0633-y
Eid, M., & Larsen, R. J. (Eds.) (2008). The science
of subjective well-being. New York, NY: Guilford
Press.
Feagin, J. R. (2014). Racist America: Roots, current
realities, and future reparations. New York, NY:
Routledge.
Ford, D. H., & Lerner, R. M. (1992). Developmental systems theory: An integrative approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Fouad, N. A., & Byars-Winston, A. M. (2005).
Cultural context of career choice: Meta-analysis
of race/ethnicity differences. Career Development
Quarterly, 53(3), 223–233. https://doi.org/10
.1002/j.2161-0045.2005.tb00992.x
Gibson-Davis, C. M., Edin, K., & McLanahan, S.
(2005). High hopes but even higher expectations:
The retreat from marriage among low-income
couples. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67,
1301–1312. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737
.2005.00218.x
Golash-Boza, T. (2016). A critical and comprehensive
sociological theory of race and racism. Sociology
of Race and Ethnicity, 2, 129–141. https://doi.org/
10.1177/2332649216632242
Green, V. H. (1936). The Negro motorist green-book.
New York, NY: Victor Green.
He, X. Z., & Baker, D. W. (2005). Differences in
leisure-time, household, and work-related physical
activity by race, ethnicity, and education. Journal
of General Internal Medicine, 20, 259–266. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.40198.x
Holoien, D. S., & Shelton, J. N. (2012). You deplete
me: The cognitive costs of colorblindness on ethnic minorities. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(2), 562–565. https://doi.org/10.1016/j
.jesp.2011.09.010
Hoffer, W. J. H. (2012). Plessy v. Ferguson: Race and
inequality in Jim Crow America. Lawrence, KS:
University Press of Kansas.
431
Hoyt, H. (1933). 100 years of land values in Chicago:
The relationship of the growth of Chicago to the
rise in its land values, 1830–1933. Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
Hughes, D., & Chen, L. (1997). When and what
parents tell children about race: An examination of race-related socialization among African
American families. Applied Developmental
Science, 1, 200–214. https://doi.org/10.1207/
s1532480xads0104_4
Hughes, D., Rodriguez, J., Smith, E. P., Johnson, D.
J., Stevenson, H. C., & Spicer, P. (2006). Parents’
ethnic-racial socialization practices: A review of
research and directions for future study. Developmental Psychology, 42, 747–770. https://doi.org/
10.1037/0012-1649.42.5.747
Hughes, D., Witherspoon, D., Rivas-Drake, D., &
West-bey, N. (2009). Received ethnic-racial socialization messages and youth’s academic and behavioral outcomes: Examining the mediating role of
ethnic identity and self-esteem. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 15, 112–124.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015509
James, A. G., & Fine, M. (2013). Race/ethnicity (as
a risk for divorce). In R. E. Emery (Ed.), Cultural sociology of divorce: An encyclopedia (pp.
426–430). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Jones, C. P. (2000). Levels of racism: A theoretic
framework and a gardener’s tale. American Journal of Public Health, 90, 1212–1215.
Juang, L. P., & Syed, M. (2014). Sharing stories
of discrimination with parents. Journal of Adolescence, 37, 303–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j
.adolescence.2014.02.004
Karger, H. J. (2005). Shortchanged: Life and debt
in the fringe economy. San Francisco, CA:
Berrett-Koehler.
Katznelson, I. (2005). When affirmative action was
White: An untold history of racial inequality
in twentieth-century America. New York, NY:
Norton.
Kazak, A. E., Segal-Andrews, A. M., & Johnson,
K. (1995). Pediatric psychology research and
practice: A family/systems approach. In M. C.
Roberts (Ed.), Handbook of pediatric psychology
(pp. 84–104). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Kelly, S., Maynigo, P., Wesley, K., & Durham, J.
(2013). African American communities and family systems: Relevance and challenges. Couple
and Family Psychology: Research and Practice, 2,
264–277. https://doi.org/10.1037/cfp0000014
Kerr, M. E. (2002). One family’s story: A primer
on Bowen theory. Washington, DC: Bowen Center
for the Study of the Family, Georgetown Family
Center.
King, W. (2011). Stolen childhood: Slave youth in
nineteenth-century America. Bloomington, IN:
Indiana University Press.
432
Lerner, R. M. (1984). On the nature of human plasticity. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Lesane-Brown, C. L. (2006). A review of race socialization within Black families. Developmental
Review, 26, 400–426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr
.2006.02.001
Lincoln, K. D., & Chae, D. H. (2010). Stress,
marital satisfaction, and psychological distress
among African Americans. Journal of Family
Issues, 31, 1081–1105. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0192513X10365826
Lipman, P. (2013). The new political economy of
urban education: Neoliberalism, race, and the
right to the city. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1970). The German ideology.
New York, NY: International.
Mayorga-Gallo, S. (2014). Behind the white picket
fence: Power and privilege in a multiethnic neighborhood. Durham, NC: University of North Carolina Press.
McHale, S. M., Crouter, A. C., Kim, J. Y., Burton, L.
M., Davis, K. D., Dotterer, A. M., & Swanson, D.
P. (2006). Mothers’ and fathers’ racial socialization in African American families: Implications for
youth. Child Development, 77, 1387–1402. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00942.x
Miller, R. L., & Miller B. (2009). Mothering
the biracial child: Bridging the gaps between
African-American and White parenting styles.
Women & Therapy, 10, 169–179. https://doi.org/
10.1300/J015v10n01_15
Misra, T. (2017, August). A catastrophe for Houston’s
most vulnerable people. The Atlantic. Retrieved
from https://www.theatlantic.com/news/archive/
2017/08/a-catastrophe-for-houstons-mostvulnerable-people/538155/
Moran, R. F. (2003). Interracial intimacy: The regulation of race and romance. Chicago, IL: University
of Chicago Press.
Morton, J. M. (2014). Cultural code-switching: Straddling the achievement gap. Journal of Political
Philosophy, 22, 259–281. https://doi.org/10.1111/
jopp.12019
Murry, V. M. B., Brown, P. A., Brody, G. H., Cutrona,
C. E., & Simons, R. L. (2001). Racial discrimination as a moderator of the links among stress,
maternal psychological functioning, and family
relationships. Journal of Marriage and Family,
63, 915–926. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737
.2001.00915.x
Neblett, E. W., White, R. L., Ford, K. R., Philip, C. L.,
Nguyên, H. X., & Sellers, R. M. (2008). Patterns of
racial socialization and psychological adjustment:
Can parental communications about race reduce
the impact of racial discrimination? Journal of
Research on Adolescence, 18, 477–515. https://doi
.org/10.1111/j.1532-7795.2008.00568.x
Journal of Family Theory & Review
Oliver, M. L., & Shapiro, T. M. (2006). Black wealth,
White wealth: A new perspective on racial inequality. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
Omi, M., & Winant, H. (2014). Racial formation in
the United States. New York, NY: Routledge.
Osamudia, J. R. (n.d.). Opt-out education: School
choice as racial subordination. Iowa Law Review,
99, 1083–1135.
Patterson, O. (1982). Slavery and social death: A comparative study. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Payne, M. (2015). Modern social work theory. New
York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Passias, E. J., Sayer, L., & Pepin, J. R. (2017). Who
experiences leisure deficits? Mothers’ marital status and leisure time. Journal of Marriage and Family, 79, 1001–1022. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf
.12365
Peters, M. F. (2002). Racial socialization of young
Black children. In H. P. McAdoo, Black children:
Social, educational, and parental environments
(2nd ed., pp. 57–72). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Pew Research Center. (2015). Parenting in
America. Pew Research Center: Social & Demographic Trends. Retrieved from https://www
.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/12/17/1-the-americanfamily-today/
Pew Research Center. (2016). On views of race
and inequality, Blacks and Whites are worlds
apart. Pew Research Center: Social & Demographic Trends. Retrieved from https://www
.pewsocialtrends.org/2016/06/27/on-views-ofrace-and-inequality-blacks-and-whites-areworlds-apart/
Phenice, L. A., & Griffore, R. J. (2000). Social identity of ethnic minority families: An ecological
approach for the new millennium. Michigan Family Review, 5(1), 29–39. https://doi.org/10.3998/
mfr.4919087.0005.103
Priest, N., Walton J., White, F., Kowal, E., Baker,
A., & Paradies, Y. (2014). Understanding the complexities of ethnic-racial socialization processes
for both minority and majority groups: A 30-year
systematic review. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 43, 139–155. https://doi.org/10
.1016/j.ijintrel.2014.08.003
Raley, R. K. (1996). A shortage of marriageable men?
A note on the role of cohabitation in black-white
differences in marriage rates. American Sociological Review, 61, 973–983. https://doi.org/10.2307/
2096303
Ramsey, C. A., & Strauss, G. (2010). Ruth and the
green book. Minneapolis, MN: Carolrhoda Books.
Reynolds, J. E., & Gonzales-Backen, M. A. (2017).
Ethnic-racial socialization and the mental health of
African Americans: A critical review. Journal of
Family Theory & Review, 9, 182–200. https://doi
.org/10.1111/jftr.12192
Race, Racism, and Family Systems Theory
Riegel, K. F. (1975). Toward a dialectical theory
of human development. Human Development, 18,
50–64. https://doi.org/10.1159/000271475
Saito, L. T. (2009). The politics of exclusion: The
failure of race-neutral policies in urban America.
Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Smock, P. J., Manning, W. D., & Porter, M. (2005).
“Everything’s there except money”: How money
shapes decisions to marry among cohabitors. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 680–696. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2005.00162.x
Squires, G. D. (1992). Community reinvestment:
An emerging social movement. In G. D. Squires
(Ed.), From redlining to reinvestment: Community responses to urban divestment (pp. 1–37).
Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
Taylor, J. (1990). Relationship between internalized
racism and marital satisfaction. Journal of Black
Psychology, 16, 45–53. https://doi.org/10.1177/
00957984900162004
Taylor, R. J., Chatters, L. M., Woodward, A. T., &
Brown, E. (2013). Racial and ethnic differences
in extended family, friendship, fictive kin, and
congregational informal support networks. Family
Relations, 62, 609–624. https://doi.org/10.1111/
fare.12030
Thelen, E., & Smith, L. B. (1998). Dynamic systems
theories. In R. M. Lerner (Series Ed.) & W. Damon
(Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol.
1. Theoretical models of human development (5th
ed., pp. 563–634). New York, NY: Wiley.
Thornton, M. C., Chatters, L. M., Taylor, R. J.,
& Allen, W. R. (1990). Sociodemographic and
environmental correlates of racial socialization of
Black parents. Child Development, 61, 401–409.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1131101
Tillman, K. H., & Miller, B. (2017). The role of
family relationships in the psychological wellbeing
of interracially dating adolescents. Social Science
Research, 65, 240–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j
.ssresearch.2016.11.001
Trail, T. E., Goff, P. A., Bradbury, T. N., & Karney,
B. R. (2012). The costs of racism for marriage how
racial discrimination hurts, and ethnic identity protects, newlywed marriages among Latinos. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 454–465.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211429450
Tynes, B. M. (2007). Role taking in online classrooms: What adolescents are learning about race
433
and ethnicity. Developmental Psychology, 43,
1312–1320. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.43
.6.1312
Turney, K. (2014). The intergenerational consequences of mass incarceration: Implications for
children’s co-residence and contact with grandparents. Social Forces, 93, 299–327. https://doi.org/
10.1093/sf/sou062
Verduzco-Baker, L. (2017). “I don’t want them to
be a statistic”: Mothering practices of low-income
mothers. Journal of Family Issues, 38, 1010–1038.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X15610616
Western, B., & Pettit, B. (2010). Collateral costs:
Incarceration’s effect on economic mobility. Washington, DC: Pew Charitable Trusts.
Whitchurch, G. G., & Constantine, L. L. (2009). Systems theory. In P. Boss, W. Doherty, R. LaRossa,
W. Schumm, & S. Steinmetz (Eds.), Sourcebook
of family theories and methods (pp. 325–355).
Boston, MA: Springer.
Williams, D. R. (1999). Race, socioeconomic status,
and health the added effects of racism and discrimination. Annals of the New York Academy of
Sciences, 896, 173–188. https://doi.org/10.1111/j
.1749-6632.1999.tb08114.x
Williams, D. R., & Collins, C. (2001). Racial residential segregation: A fundamental cause of racial
disparities in health. Public Health Reports, 116,
404. https://doi.org/10.1093/phr/116.5.404
Williams, H. A. (2012). Help me to find my people:
The African American search for family lost in
slavery. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.
Winker, M. A. (2004). Measuring race and ethnicity:
Why and how? JAMA, 292, 1612–1614.
Woods, L. L. (2012). The Federal Home Loan Bank
board, redlining, and the national proliferation of
racial lending discrimination, 1921–1950. Journal
of Urban History, 38(6), 1036–1059. https://doi
.org/10.1177/0096144211435126
Yamamoto, E. K. (1998). Racial reparations: Japanese
American redress and African American claims.
Boston College Third World Law Journal, 19,
477–523.
Zhang, Y. (2011). Boundaries of power: Politics of
urban preservation in two Chicago neighborhoods.
Urban Affairs Review, 47, 511–540. https://doi
.org/10.1177/1078087411400376
Copyright of Journal of Family Theory & Review is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.
Asian American Journal of Psychology
© 2018 American Psychological Association
1948-1985/19/$12.00
2019, Vol. 10, No. 2, 91–102
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/aap0000128
Racist Experiences, Openness to Discussing Racism, and Attitudes Toward
Ethnic Heritage Activities: Adoptee–Parent Discrepancies
Kimberly J. Langrehr, Sydney K. Morgan, Jessica Ross, Monica Oh, and Wen Wen Chong
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
University of Missouri—Kansas City
This study used hierarchical linear modeling to examine discrepancies among 95 dyads of Asian
adolescent transnational adoptees and their parents (N ⫽ 190). Results revealed that parents
underestimated the degree to which adoptees experienced racism and overestimated their positive
attitudes toward ethnic heritage activities and openness to discussing racism. Adoptees with a high
percentage of friends of color reported fewer racist experiences; however, parents with a high
percentage of friends of color perceived adoptees to experience higher instances of racism. In
addition, parents with low colorblind attitudes overestimated adoptees’ positive attitudes toward
ethnic heritage activities and openness to discussing racism; whereas, at both high and low levels of
colorblind attitudes, parents underestimated adoptees’ racist experiences. Implications that center on
the perspectives of Asian adolescent transnational adoptees as well as practical suggestions for
clinicians and adoption professionals are discussed.
What is the public significance of this article?
Based on a study that compared the reports of 95 Asian transnational adoptees and their parents,
results indicated that parents overestimated adoptees’ openness to discussing racism and their
positive attitudes toward ethnic heritage activities; however, results also revealed that parents
underestimated the level of racism experienced by adoptees. Although parents’ level of racial
awareness made a difference in their views toward adoptees’ encouraging behaviors, all parents,
regardless of their racial awareness, underestimated the racism experienced by adoptees. Results
speak to the need to explore Asian transnational adoptees’ views of their parents’ willingness to
discuss issues of racism and the nature of the racial messages that they receive.
Keywords: transnational adoption, adoptees, colorblind attitudes, racism, socialization
Supplemental materials: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/aap0000128.supp
research on transnational adoption was largely concerned with
behavioral and adjustment outcomes and failed to adequately
address the sociocultural implications of within-family racial
difference on the developmental experiences of ATAs (Lee,
2003). For the current study purpose, we will use the terms
adoptee and transnational adoptee interchangeably when referring to ATAs who have been adopted by White American
parents (i.e., adoptive parents).
Over the past 15 years, however, studies have made attempts
to address the sociocultural implications of transnational adoption in the lives of ATAs by focusing on parents’ efforts to
familiarize adoptees with different aspects of their ethnic heritage (Lee, Grotevant, Hellerstedt, & Gunnar, 2006; Lee &
Quintana, 2005). This body of research has been characterized
as largely parent-driven (Kim, Reichwald, & Lee, 2013), as
most studies have relied on the perspectives of parents with
young children. Findings suggest that parents of ATAs tend to
overlook the topic of racial difference (Zhang & Lee, 2011) and
rarely talk to adoptees about racism (Berbery & O’Brien, 2011;
Johnston, Swim, Saltsman, Deater-Deckard, & Petrill, 2007;
Langrehr, 2014). Knowledge gained from this research has
Since the mid-1950s, Asian countries have remained the
primary source of transnational adoptions for White American
families (Selman, 2015; U.S. Department of State, 2010). Unlike domestic transracial adoptions where early disputes are
centered on the impact of racial difference for Black children
(Brooks & Barth, 1999), debates concerning Asian transnational adoptees (ATAs) have not been as concerned with race
(Lee & Miller, 2009). For example, White families were initially advised to raise ATAs “as if they were White,” based on
the assumption that emphasizing racial differences would negatively affect their development (Lee, 2003). Similarly, early
This article was published Online First September 13, 2018.
Kimberly J. Langrehr, Sydney K. Morgan, Jessica Ross, Monica Oh, and
Wen Wen Chong, Counseling and Educational Psychology Program,
School of Education, University of Missouri—Kansas City.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Kimberly
J. Langrehr, Counseling and Educational Psychology Program, School of
Education, University of Missouri—Kansas City, 5100 Rockhill Road,
Kansas City, MO 64110. E-mail: langrehrk@umkc.edu
91
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
92
LANGREHR, MORGAN, ROSS, OH, AND CHONG
mostly applied to adoptees’ early developmental experiences
without addressing their understanding of race and ethnicity in
adolescence. Unlike young children who have a rudimentary
understanding of race, adolescents of color are often exposed to
the realities of race as they learn how to navigate the demands
of a racialized world (Hughes, Watford, & Del Toro, 2016). For
example, ATAs must learn to negotiate their self-concept as
Asian Americans in relation to their understanding of White
individuals, given that most are raised in predominantly White
areas and have minimal contact with Asian Americans or other
people of color (Langrehr, Yoon, Hacker, & Caudill, 2015;
Meier, 1999). As a result, ATAs are often highly aware of their
out-group status as people of color (Day, Godon-Decoteau, &
Suyemoto, 2015; Kim, Suyemoto, & Turner, 2010) and may
hold perspectives about race, culture, and ethnicity that are not
always consistent with that of their parents (Kim et al., 2013)
who face a different social reality based on their racial majority
status.
Studies suggest that White Americans are less inclined to consider themselves as having a racial identity or belonging to a racial
group, which can make it difficult to recognize the implications of
race and privilege in their lives (Bonilla-Silva, Goar, & Embrick,
2006). For example, it is not uncommon for White individuals to
endorse the belief that race does not matter (Carr, 1997), as this
allows them to deny or minimize the significance of racism in
contemporary society (Neville, Lilly, Duran, Lee, & Browne,
2000). By supporting the ideals of colorblindness, White individuals can situate themselves to live and function in predominantly
White communities, which minimizes their exposure to the undesirable realities of racial injustice. Based on their adoptive status,
many ATAs have gained admittance into these communities where
they are treated by others (and sometimes themselves) as members
of the majority (Lee, 2003); yet, unlike their parents, they still face
the demands of navigating their out-group status within the context
of a highly racialized society.
In an effort to help bridge some of these experiences between
ATAs and their parents, a goal of the current study was to specifically examine discrepancies in their reports about adoptees’ experiences with racism, openness to discussing racism, and attitudes
toward ethnic heritage activities. Based on the tenets of social
identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1986), we expected to find
significant discrepancies in adoptee–parent reports, given that
ATAs face different sociocultural experiences due to their racial
out-group status. Although it is not uncommon for parents and
children to hold different perspectives, studies suggest there is a
greater likelihood for relational conflict (Kim, Zarit, Birditt, &
Fingerman, 2014) and adjustment difficulties (Ohannessian, 2012)
when family members hold significantly different views about
sensitive issues, such as racism. In addition, it is particularly important
to explore parents’ ability to recognize the racial nature of ATAs’
experiences, given that racial prejudice can have a negative impact
on youth of color (García Coll et al., 1996; Qin, Kim, Su, Hu, &
Lee, 2017) and has been specifically linked with increased behavioral difficulties (Hjern, Lindblad, & Vinnerljung, 2002; Lee,
2010) and higher psychological distress among international
adoptees (Lee, Lee, Hu, & Kim, 2015). Overall, the study results
are intended to provide a more critical understanding of the experiences of ATAs and other transnational adoptees as people of
color.
ATA Racial–Ethnic Experiences
Ethnic Heritage Exposure
Unlike early transnational adoption practices, findings from
contemporary research suggest that parents are now making concerted efforts to expose young ATAs to affirming aspects of their
ethnic heritage. Specifically, studies have examined parents’ efforts to celebrate ethnic holidays (Johnston et al., 2007), travel to
adoptees’ country of birth, read culturally relevant books (Freidlander
et al., 2000), and take language classes (Crolley-Simic & Vonk,
2011). Although such activities have been linked to positive identity outcomes (Lee & Quintana, 2005), the importance of these
activities for adolescent ATAs remains less apparent, given that
these findings are largely based on parents’ perceptions of adoptees early on in their development. As they reach their teens, studies
suggest that ATAs become less interested in exploring their ethnic
background (Meier, 1999) and more concerned about fitting in
with their White peers. For example, some ATAs have reported
that they purposefully avoided ethnically based events, feeling as
though their involvement would highlight their racial differences
(Langrehr et al., 2015). With the exception of traveling to Korea,
adult Korean adoptees have identified other ways of meaningfully
connecting with their heritage, such as living in racially diverse
areas, interacting with other people of color, and learning about
their birth family (McGinnis, Smith, Ryan, & Howard, 2009).
Racialized Experiences
Although issues of race have not been largely represented in the
discourse concerning transnational adoption, existing research suggests that ATAs are not exempt from racial stress and prejudice
(Kim et al., 2010; Lee et al., 2015; Qin et al., 2017). As they age
and develop more cognitive maturity, studies suggest that ATAs
often face a variety of racial stressors. For example, adolescent
ATAs report feeling uncomfortable with being racially different
(Day et al., 2015; McGinnis et al., 2009) and greater incidents of
racism compared with younger adoptees (Lee & Quintana, 2005).
However, research also suggests that transnationally adoptive parents make minimal effort to address adoptees’ lived experiences
with racism and place more emphasis on fostering adoptees’ ethnic
heritage (Berbery & O’Brien, 2011). In particular, parents have
been depicted as eager and enthusiastic in discussing their efforts
to familiarize ATAs with their ethnic background; whereas, they
have also been found to avoid the topic of racism (Kim et al.,
2013), describe preferences for colorblind parenting (Zhang &
Lee, 2011), and normalize racism as a universal experience
(Crolley-Simic & Vonk, 2011).
Overall, these findings pose questions about transnationally
adoptive parents’ ability to recognize and address the significance
of racism in the lives of ATAs (Quiroz, 2012). Studies on monoracial families of color suggest that encouraging adolescents to talk
about their experiences with racism can help parents foster an
overall sense of trust and connection (Tatum, 2004). However,
research on transnationally adoptive families has rarely touched on
the importance of helping ATAs cope with racism. Instead, adult
Korean adoptees have described their parents as ill-equipped to
talk about issues of racism (Shiao & Tuan, 2008) and as dismissing
the painful nature of their racist encounters (Meier, 1999) to the
RACIST EXPERIENCES
degree that some lost confidence in their parents’ ability to protect
and support them (Langrehr et al., 2015). At the same time, some
Korean adoptees have reported that they were comfortable reaching out to their parents who they felt acknowledged their racist
experiences and validated their feelings of marginalization (Shiao
& Tuan, 2008). To help gain insight about why some parents are
more likely than others to recognize and attend to adoptees’
racialized needs, we address some of the influences involved with
the racial identity process for White Americans that are distinguishable from that of ATAs.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Colorblind Attitudes and Connection to White Identity
Although colorblind attitudes are prevalent across society and
have been linked with socialization practices among monoracial
families (Barr & Neville, 2008), the implications of colorblind
attitudes are particularly relevant to the racial identity processes of
White Americans and transnationally adoptive parents. Also
known as contemporary racism (Carr, 1997), the pervasiveness of
colorblind attitudes has helped maintain the dominance of White
racial identities that continue to shape notions of normality, acceptance, and American culture as a whole (Bonilla-Silva, 2003).
For example, White individuals often consider living in all-White
neighborhoods, attending predominantly White schools, and having few interracial friends as being natural, unproblematic, and
unrelated with race (Bonilla-Silva et al., 2006). By distancing
themselves from race, White individuals reinforce symbolic
boundaries that favor White in-group status and simultaneously
devalue racial out-groups. Often endorsed by the well-intended,
colorblind mentalities enable White Americans to view themselves
as open and socially progressive despite being uncomfortable with
racial difference (Bonilla-Silva et al., 2006).
Several studies on transnationally adoptive parents have addressed their tendency to endorse colorblind racial attitudes and
minimize the significance of race in the lives of ATAs (CrolleySimic & Vonk, 2011). For example, parents with colorblind mentalities have been found to express more ambivalence toward
adoptees’ ethnic background and prefer socialization messages
that endorse fairness and racial equality without also acknowledging the realities of racial injustice (Crolley-Simic & Vonk, 2011;
Zhang & Lee, 2011). In contrast, low colorblind attitudes have
been linked with beneficial outcomes such as greater endorsement
of racial– ethnic socialization among internationally adoptive families (Langrehr, 2014; Lee et al., 2006).
Contact and Friends of Color
In general, White Americans often live and function in racially
homogenous spaces and maintain relatively distant relationships
with people of color (Bonilla-Silva et al., 2006). This is particularly evident for transnationally adoptive families who tend to
reside in predominantly White communities (Langrehr, 2014;
Meier, 1999; Shiao & Tuan, 2008) and engage in few interracial
relationships (Zhang & Lee, 2011) outside of their interactions
with other transnationally adoptive families (Crolley-Simic &
Vonk, 2011; Freidlander et al., 2000). According to contact theory
(Allport, 1954), rarely engaging in meaningful interracial contact
could ultimately thwart parents’ opportunities to gain a genuine
understanding of adoptees’ experiences with racism. For decades,
93
studies have investigated the value of intergroup contact in reducing prejudicial attitudes across a variety of groups. Although the
benefits of general contact have been mixed, contemporary research has found evidence to support its effectiveness when the
conditions of optimal contact are met (Davies, Tropp, Aron, Pettigrew, & Wright, 2011). Comparable with close personal friendships, the optimal conditions of contact (i.e., equal social status,
shared goals, incentive to cooperate, and authority support) have
been especially effective in promoting greater awareness and understanding of other groups (Brewer & Miller, 1984). In the only
study that has addressed the value of racial contact for transnationally adoptive families, results revealed that parents who lived
in racially diverse areas engaged in more interracial friendships
and endorsed stronger messages of racial bias preparation and
ethnic pride (Langrehr, 2014).
Unlike their parents, living in predominantly White environments can have different implications for ATAs, given that they
have fewer opportunities to interact with members of their racial
group. For example, having minimal contact with Asian Americans and other people of color could unintentionally compromise
adoptees’ psychosocial development, sense of belongingness, and
ability to mitigate stresses associated with their non-White identity
(Tatum, 2004). Establishing same-race connections is considered
adaptive for adolescents of color (García Coll et al., 1996), particularly when their relationships are based on shared experiences
with marginalization. At the same time, peers can also be perpetrators of racial prejudice (Hughes et al., 2016), especially for
Asian youth who are often targets of peer-initiated racism (RivasDrake, Hughes, & Way, 2008). Indeed, many ATAs have identified their peers as the main perpetrators of racism growing up
(Meier, 1999; Shiao & Tuan, 2008); yet, others have described
several early racial encounters that involved adults and strangers
(Langrehr et al., 2015).
Study Purpose
The purpose of the current study was to examine the dyadic
reports of adolescent ATAs and their parents about adoptees’ racist
experiences, openness to discussing racism, and attitudes toward
ethnic heritage activities. Based on the tenets of social identity
theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1986), which highlights the unique implications of racial out-group status, we focused on adoptees’
experiences as people of color within the context of their White
families and specifically examined adoptee–parent discrepancies.
Based on previous research that suggested that transnationally
adoptive parents tend to minimize discussions of racism (CrolleySimic & Vonk, 2011; Kim et al., 2013) and prefer the affirming
nature of ethnic heritage exposure (Johnston et al., 2007; Zhang &
Lee, 2011), we hypothesized that parents would underestimate
adoptees’ racist experiences and overestimate their openness to
discussing racism and positive attitudes toward ethnic heritage
activities.
To provide some context for these differences, we tested the
degree to which parents’ colorblind racial attitudes, adoptee age,
and living in racially diverse neighborhoods were associated with
these discrepancies. We expected that stronger colorblind attitudes, older adoptee age, and living in neighborhoods with a low
percentage of people of color would relate to discrepancies where
parents underestimated adoptees’ racist experiences and overesti-
LANGREHR, MORGAN, ROSS, OH, AND CHONG
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
94
mated their openness to discussing racism and positive attitudes
toward ethnic heritage activities. Finally, based on the optimal
conditions of contact theory (Davies et al., 2011; Langrehr, 2014;
Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006) and evidence that points to the benefits
of establishing same-race connections for youth of color (García
Coll et al., 1996; Tatum, 2004), we examined the relationships
between maintaining close friendships with people of color and the
three outcome variables for ATAs and their parents. We hypothesized that adoptees with a high proportion of friends of color
would report fewer racist experiences, greater openness to discussing racism, and positive attitudes toward ethnic heritage activities.
For parents, we expected that percentage of friends of color would
relate differently to the three outcome variables, but did not provide directional hypotheses due to the exploratory nature of the
study.
Method
Participants
For the current investigation, data were taken from a larger
study that examined socialization processes among transnationally
adoptive families. Participants were recruited from two adoptive
family organizations located in different areas of the Midwest. All
recruitment and data collection procedures were approved by the
authors’ respective university institutional review board. Data collection took place during organization-sponsored events where
parents and adoptees took part in various social– cultural activities
throughout the day. The current study goal was to recruit dyads
that consisted of one ATA (age ⱖ10) and one White, adoptive
parent who were both present at the event. Parents were given a
description of the study purpose, procedures, and consent process.
Specifically, parents were asked to provide verbal consent indicating that they and their children were willing to participate in the
study. Once parents verbally consented, adoptees were given a
similar study description and were asked to provide verbal assent.
If multiple adoptees from the same family participated, parents
were asked to base their reports on the oldest child. Although 100
adoptee–parent dyads agreed to participate, five cases involving
adoptees from non-Asian countries were excluded from the final
sample of 95 adoptee–parent dyads (N ⫽ 190).
Adoptees (girls ⫽ 70%, boys ⫽ 30%) ranged in age from 10 to
17 years (M ⫽ 14.19, SD ⫽ 2.25) and represented the following
ethnic groups: Chinese (n ⫽ 71), South Korean (n ⫽ 16), Taiwanese (n ⫽ 6), and Vietnamese (n ⫽ 2). Average age at the time of
adoption was 13.40 months (SD ⫽ 2.41) and ranged from 6
months to 2.75 years. Parents’ ages ranged from 40 to 69 years
(M ⫽ 49.92, SD ⫽ 5.71), and 59% were women and 41% were
men. In addition, all parents identified as White and 95% identified
as heterosexual. The majority of parents were partnered or married
(74%), and 42% indicated having other transnationally adopted
children. Parents were highly educated (62% held advanced degrees), and 56% reported household annual incomes of over
$100,000.
Procedure
At each event, several announcements were made throughout
the day to inform adoptees and parents of the opportunity to
participate in the study. Each adoptee–parent dyad who agreed to
participate were given one questionnaire packet for adoptees and
one questionnaire packet for parents. Adoptees’ questionnaire
packets included measures that asked about their racist experiences, openness to discussing racism, and attitudes toward ethnic
heritage activities, as well as a data form that asked about their
racial friendships and interpersonal behaviors such as assertiveness
and willingness to self-disclose. Parents’ questionnaire packets
included measures that asked about the aforementioned experiences of their oldest adopted child and a measure of colorblind
attitudes. In addition, parents’ questionnaire packets included a
data form that asked them to provide demographic information
about themselves and their family (e.g., age, gender, marital status,
and household income) and the racial demographics of their close
personal friends and neighborhood. All survey items and demographic questions included in adoptees’ questionnaire packets
were modified to accommodate a fourth-grade reading level. The
principal investigator and research assistants were present at the
events to answer questions and help participants (primarily adoptees) complete the questionnaires. Upon submitting both questionnaires, each adoptee–parent dyad received one $5.00 gift card for
participating in the study.
Measures—Completed by Adoptees and Parents
Experiences with racism. At the time of the current study,
there were no published measures available to accommodate the
multi-informant approach to examining adoptees’ experiences
with racism. Given that the goal was to assess the racist experiences of ATAs that would also be observable by parents, we
adapted items from a previous study (Lee, 2010) on internationally
adoptive parents and their perceptions of discrimination. The original measure was created to specifically assess the frequency by
which different parties (e.g., strangers, family members, and peers)
made intrusive or inappropriate racial and adoption comments
toward participants’ children or family. Using this same format,
four items were created that asked adoptees to indicate how often
they experienced racism from friends, peers, strangers, and other
family members (i.e., How often do your friends tease or say mean
things about your race or ethnicity? How often do other kids tease
or say mean things about your race or ethnicity? How often do
strangers tease or say mean things to you about your race or
ethnicity? How often do other family members tease or say mean
things to you about your race or ethnicity?). Four additional items
were created (similar to the statements presented to adoptees) that
asked parents to indicate how often their adopted child experienced racism from friends, peers, strangers, and other family
members (e.g., How often do your child’s friends tease or say
mean things to them about their race or ethnicity?). Both adoptees
and parents responded to each statement using a scale from 1
(never) to 6 (all of the time), with higher ratings indicating more
experiences with racism. Scores were calculated by summing the
four adoptee-rated items and the four parent-rated items to create
two total scores of racist experiences that could range from 4 to 24.
As recommended by Kenny, Kashy, and Cook (2006), exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted using principal axis
factoring and oblimin rotation to ensure that the constructs of
interest emerge consistently across individual and combined samples. Using Tabachnick and Fidell’s (2001) standard criteria for
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
RACIST EXPERIENCES
determining the number of factors to retain (i.e., eigenvalues ⬎1,
factors explaining at least 5% of variance, interpretable factors, loadings of ⱖ0.32, scree test, and discarding cross-loaded items ⬎0.32),
EFA results revealed that racist experiences emerged as a single
factor and explained 48.63%–54.34% of the variance in individual
and full sam...
Purchase answer to see full
attachment