In response to this column by Andrew Greeley, an adoptive parent writes as follows:
My son is a foreigner, but he was adopted and naturalized in accordance with the legal procedures of his home country and of the United States.
I love my son desperately, regardless of his nation of birth, and regardless of the fact that he is an immigrant.
But in sleazy, yellow-journalist style, Greeley accuses me of hating all immigrants because I support the principle that our nation should have the power to protect its borders and sovereignty …
“Regardless of the fact that he is an immigrant?” How very open-minded of you.
This is another example of how privilege blinds (primarily white) adoptive parents to issues that deeply affect their children. My child is an American, they say. My child was legally adopted. My child came to this country legally. Not like those people.
They don’t stop to think for a moment that their children may be perpetually seen as foreigners once outside the blanket of privilege that whiteness provides. They don’t think about how racist laws make it easy to bring an adopted child into the country while preventing parents from bringing their birth children. And they don’t see how their anti-immigrant bigotry affects their children. Do you think being American protected anybody at the L.A. immigration rally?
The average white American adoptive parent doesn’t see the issues of communities of color or immigrants as being issues that affect his or her children. On some level I believe this is because they don’t really see their children as persons of color or immigrants. They believe all that privilege will just rub on off.
Of course I love you, little Jason. You’re not like those people.
Of course I love you, little Jason. You’re not one of those immigrants. You’re the good kind.

17 comments
Comments feed for this article
June 9, 2007 at 10:18 am
links for 2007-06-09 at Racialicious - the intersection of race and pop culture
[...] ‘My son is a foreigner’ – Resist racism “They don’t think about how racist laws make it easy to bring an adopted child into the country while preventing parents from bringing their birth children. And they don’t see how their anti-immigrant bigotry affects their children. Do you think being (tags: internationaladoption immigration whiteprivilege) [...]
June 11, 2007 at 4:31 pm
kadnexus
I think it’s also important to take into account that there are actually scores of adoptees who are NOT citizens, and were not naturalized by their adoptive parents.
I just recently meddled with some census data on adoption citizenship status in the state of Massachusetts. There are approximately over 1,600 un-naturalized adoptees of Asian descent just in the state. There are about 360 Korean adoptees in the state who are un-naturalized green card holders. Chinese Adoptees make up the largest un-naturalized population in the state with around 680.
So I always find it interesting when a-parents discuss these sort of delicate issues of immigration and their children. Should we protect our country from these adoptees who pose a threat to the sovereignty of our country? Are they any less deserving than adoptees who’s parents did naturalize? Furthermore, are adoptees any more deserving than immigrant families who are looking for better lives here in the U.S. just as our birth parents looked to provide us with better lives?
You’re totally right, there are untapped issues of white privilege. There are also issues of entitlement privilege as well. Thanks for the thought provoking post.
June 11, 2007 at 8:33 pm
mike
White people adopting non-white babies absolutely disgusts me.
I don’t think one is able to realize how perverted a situation this really is unless one is also non-white and knows exactly what life in America is like as such a person.
White people, will you leave the babies alone? Please?
June 12, 2007 at 3:20 am
Mogs
Mike, I don’t understand you. Adoption is good for everyone- for the kids who might not otherwise have a home, for the parents who might not otherwise get a chance to raise children. Race has nothing to do with it… or of anything else of real importance for that matter.
June 12, 2007 at 10:59 am
m
Mike – you’ve got to realize that “white” people are a diverse group of people. We are not all the same.
Mogs – I’m assuming (hoping) your comment is intended as sarcasm.
RR (sorry, I don’t know your name)- I wonder if the average “white” parent even thinks it through this thoroughly. I think the ideas you mention are really automatic assumptions that go unchallenged in the minds of these particular aparents. I wish I could have more discussions about race with my fellow “white” aparents.
June 12, 2007 at 1:01 pm
resistance
kadnexus, the number of non-naturalized adoptees is scary. How did you extract this info?
A lot of times adoptive parents don’t think about their children’s citizenship because of all the assumed privileges. So unfortunately I predict we’ll see more deportations of adult adoptees.
June 12, 2007 at 1:21 pm
margaret
KadNexus – I’m shocked at the # of Chinese adoptees who are not citizens. Can I ask how old these kids are, if you know? The law was changed prior to my children being adopted, so now when the land in the States, they are made citizens right in the airport.
June 13, 2007 at 2:36 am
Mogs
sorry to disappoint you, m … not sarcasm, although perhaps poorly phrased. the “real importance” I wrote of refers to relationships within a family, not the world in general…
June 13, 2007 at 12:57 pm
gabriela63
margaret, this is not true for all adoptees and anyway “automatic” is never truly automatic if you still have to prove to someone what that means. like when you’re being deported…
June 13, 2007 at 4:25 pm
margaret
Gabriela….I’m not sure what part of my post you are responding to. Are you referring to automatic citizenship granted children entering the country as adopted children of Americans? If this is what you meant, then I guess it could be possibly for parents to actually not make their children citizens right in the airport even though the child has that right under the law.
Or, are you referring to the automatic assumptions that I think some aparents make regarding how they see their internationally adopted children vs. other immigrants?
June 13, 2007 at 7:47 pm
kadnexus
Resistance/Margaret,
Here’s a post from my blog where I originally posted the information I found.
http://kadnexus.wordpress.com/2007/05/11/non-citizen-adoptees-in-the-state-of-massachusetts/
It’s all original research I did with Census Data PUMS in Massachusetts.
The 2000 Census included a question of household relationship, so naturally that opened the gates for adoption being an answer. In addition it included country of origins as well.
There was a similar report that was release in California that I could take a look at in terms of the ages of the adoptees, but it’s hard to tell what particular adoption waves they fit into since it only records their ages at the time of census data collection rather than when they actually came to the states. I’ll do some digging and if I find an answer to the age question, I’ll let you know.
And yes you’re right, the Child Citizenship Act in 2000 granted adoptees automatic citizenship. But the thing I don’t understand is why the policy wasn’t retroactively applied. And the ironic thing is that most of the un-naturalized adoptees as an age cohort probably would have been the ones to benefit the most from a bill to grant automatic citizenship to adoptees. I think it’s much more common understanding that naturalization is just part of the process.
I’m hoping at some point to get some funding to produce some research on a national level related to un-naturalized Asian American adoptees. So I’ll keep you posted.
June 13, 2007 at 8:15 pm
resistance
kadnexus, thanks for the additional information. I didn’t realize the census data included naturalization/citizenship information.
The Child Citizenship Act only applied retroactively to individuals who were still under 18 and who arrived on IR-3 visas. Rep. Delahunt originally intended for the Act to cover adoptees over the age of majority, but this was shot down.
Adoptees who arrive on IR-4 visas do not get automatic citizenship.
June 13, 2007 at 8:33 pm
kadnexus
Hi Resistance,
I remember reading about that particular provision regarding IR-3s, but thanks for the clarification on the IR-4s.
G.S.
June 13, 2007 at 11:54 pm
margaret
Thanks KadNexus!
June 14, 2007 at 9:24 am
gabriela63
margaret – as Resistance has clarified, adoptees who arrive on IR-4 visas do not get automatic citizenship under the new law.
June 14, 2007 at 10:23 pm
margaret
Gabriela – thx for responding and clarifying. I really wasn’t aware that this was still happening to any intl adoptees who arrived in the US with both adoptive parents (with both being US citizens themselves).
June 14, 2007 at 10:27 pm
margaret
Ah, ignore my previous message. I just found out what an IR4 visa is:
http://guangzhou.usconsulate.gov/ir4visa.html
This is EXACTLY the reason why both of us will travel for each adoption….immediate protection for our new child.