Instability and Family Belonging: Young Adult Adoptee Experiences

Background/Purpose: For children in foster care for whom reunification has been ruled out, adoption is an important permanency outcome. Living in a safe and stable adoptive family can promote children’s well-being. However, the trauma, grief and loss associated with adoption can impede adoptive family well-being. Furthermore, some children who exit foster care through adoption no longer reside with the adoptive parent; they may reenter foster care (RFC) or may live apart (LA) from their adoptive families through homelessness, runaway, or similar situations.

Methods: Survey results are presented separately for the 201 young adults (YA) and 288 adoptive parent (AP) respondents, using descriptive analysis and logistic regression, to explore: (1) What is the prevalence of instability (RFC and LA)? (2) What was going on in their family at the time of the instability? (3) What risk and protective factors are associated with instability?

Results: A total of 33% of the sample experienced instability (8% RFC, 24% LA). Of the 75 YA who reported instability, they were also asked what was happening at the time the instability occurred (not mutually exclusive categories): 56% reported that they needed help with mental health and/or substance use; 53% reported not feeling accepted by their adoptive family generally and/or because of sexual orientation and race/ethnicity, 36% reported not feeling safe in the family; 21% reported that their adoptive parents did not allow them to live at home and 13% said that a member of their adoptive family did not feel safe because of the YA’s behavior.

In the YA regression model one factor showed a statistically significant relationship with post-adoption instability, after accounting for other factors: a greater level of nurturing and attachment (PFS N&A subscale) as reported by the YA was associated with a decreased likelihood of instability (OR=0.69, 95%CI=0.457- 0.978).

The AP regression model found two statistically significant associations after accounting for other factors: When AP reported that the children had externalizing behavior problems in the clinical range on the CBCL, the children were also at higher risk (OR=2.21; 95%CI= 1.017-4.780) for instability than those who were not reported to have externalizing clinical behavior problems. Additionally, higher scores on the parental report of PFS N&A subscale were associated with less risk for instability (OR=0.63, 95%CI=0.453- 0.863).

Conclusions/Implications: This study provides a first estimate of the prevalence of LA, an important addition to our understanding of adoptive family well-being. The prevalence of informal LA was much higher than formal RFC. This study also provides the adoptee’s report of what was occurring at the time of the instability. Findings suggest a complex dynamic of adoptees’ mental health and substance issues and both child and parental sense of safety and acceptance in the family that may warrant future investigation. These are important considerations when considering potential interventions. Consistent with prior research, child behavioral issues have a deleterious impact on instability, and a sense of nurturing and attachment can serve as a protective factor.