Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Adoption Status and Parental Investments: A Within-sibling Approach

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Child and Family Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Recent studies have found that adoptive parents invest in their children equally or more than biological parents do. Most of these studies observed relationships across families, comparing families with adopted children to those without. In this study, alternatively, we focused on within-family comparisons to more fully isolate the relationship between biological ties and parental investments. Using American Time Use Survey (2007–2018; n = 1,152 children) and American Community Survey (2014–2018; n = 34,673 children) data, we employed within-family fixed effects regression models and focused on both parental time and financial investments, using private school enrollment as a proxy for the latter. Our findings show that parents spent less one-on-one, quality, and total time daily with adopted children compared to biological children. In terms of financial investments, 90% of children in the sample received equal investments, meaning that either all or no siblings within the same family were enrolled in private school. However, among families with enrollment differences between siblings, adopted children were significantly less likely than their non-adopted siblings to be enrolled in private school. These findings show that adopted children within mixed-adoption families may receive equal or fewer investments than their non-adopted siblings. The findings highlight the possibility of selection as an interpretation of the adoptive-child advantage, illustrate the importance of within-family studies on this topic, and point to the complexity of parental investments in adopted children.

Highlights

  • Adopted children in mixed-adoption families experienced fewer parental time investments than their non-adopted siblings.

  • Most (90% of) children in mixed-adoption families experienced equality among siblings in private school enrollment.

  • When differences occurred, adopted children were less often enrolled in private school than their non-adopted siblings.

  • Selection may explain the adoptive-child advantage in parental investments.

  • Findings also suggest that mixed-adoption families are unique and should be the focus of future studies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alquraini, T., & Gut, D. (2012). Critical components of successful inclusion of students with severe disabilities: Literature review. International Journal of Special Education, 27(1), 42–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Altintas, E. (2016). The widening education gap in developmental child care activities in the United States, 1965–2013. Journal of Marriage and Family, 78(1), 26–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aurini, J., & Davies, S. (2005). Choice without markets: homeschooling in the context of private education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 26(4), 461–474.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amato, P. R. (2010). Research on divorce: continuing trends and new developments. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72(3), 650–666.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, K. G., Kaplan, H., & Lancaster, J. (1999). Paternal care by genetic fathers and stepfathers I: reports from Albuquerque men. Evolution and Human Behavior, 20(6), 405–431.

    Google Scholar 

  • Archer, J. (2013). Can evolutionary principles explain patterns of family violence? Psychological Bulletin, 139(2), 403–440.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Baden, A. L., Shadel, D., Morgan, R., White, E. E., Harrington, E. S., Christian, N., & Bates, T. A. (2019). Delaying adoption disclosure: a survey of late discovery adoptees. Journal of Family Issues, 40(9), 1154–1180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartholet, E. (1993). Family bonds: adoption and the politics of parenting. Houghton Mifflin.

  • Becker, G., & Tomes, N. (1976). Child endowments and the quantity and quality of children. Journal of Political Economy, 84(4), 143–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bodovski, K., & Farkas, G. (2008). “Concerted cultivation” and unequal achievement in elementary school. Social Science Research, 37(3), 903–919.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bramlett, M. D. (2010). When stepparents adopt: demographic, health and health care characteristics of adopted children, stepchildren, and adopted stepchildren. Adoption Quarterly, 13(3–4), 248–267.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buddin, R., Cordes, J. J., & Kirby, S. (1998). School choice in California: who chooses private schools? Journal of Urban Economics, 44, 110–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bulanda, R. E., & Majumdar, D. (2009). Perceived parent–child relations and adolescent self-esteem. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 18(2), 203–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, S., & Powell, B. (2007). Under and beyond constraints: resource allocation to young children from biracial families. American Journal of Sociology, 112(4), 1044–1094.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cherlin, A. (1978). Remarriage as an incomplete institution. American Journal of Sociology, 84(3), 634–650.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalton, B., Ingels, S. J., & Fritch, L. (2016). High School Longitudinal Study of 2009 (HSLS: 09). 2013 update and High School Transcript Study: a first look at fall 2009 ninth-graders in 2013. National Center for Education Statistics.

  • Daly, M., & Wilson, M. I. (1996). Violence against stepchildren. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 5(3), 77–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, A. M. (2011). Why do parents choose to send their children to private schools? Doctoral dissertation, Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 382. (Georgia Southern University). https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/etd/382

  • DiPrete, T. A., & Buchmann, C. (2013). The rise of women: the growing gender gap in education and what it means for American schools. Russell Sage Foundation.

  • Fine, D. (2000). Adoptive family needs assessment: final report. Salem, OR: Oregon Department of Human Resources State Office of Services to Children and Families.

    Google Scholar 

  • Firebaugh, G. (2008). Seven rules for social research. Princeton University Press.

  • Fisher, A. P. (2003). Still “not quite as good as having your own”? Toward a sociology of adoption. Annual Review of Sociology, 29(1), 335–361.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibby, A., & Thomas, K. J. (2019). Adoption: a strategy to fulfill sex preferences of U.S. Parents. Journal of Marriage and Family, 81(2), 531–541.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, K. (2009). Differential parental investment in families with both adopted and genetic children. Evolution and Human Behavior, 30(3), 184–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldring, E. B., & Phillips, K. J. (2008). Parent preferences and parent choices: the public-private decision about school choice. Journal of Education Policy, 23(3), 209–230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould, E. D., Simhon, A., & Weinberg, B. A. (2019). Does parent quality matter? Evidence on the transmission of human capital using variation in parental influence from death, divorce, and family size. Journal of Labor Economics. https://doi.org/10.1086/705904

  • Green, C. L., & Hoover-Dempsey, K. V. (2007). Why do parents homeschool? A systematic examination of parental involvement. Education and Urban Society, 39(2), 264–285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamermesh, D. S., Frazis, H., & Stewart, J. (2005). Data watch: the American time use survey. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(1), 221–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, L., Cheng, S., & Powell, B. (2007). Adoptive parents, adaptive parents: evaluating the importance of biological ties for parental investment. American Sociological Review, 72(1), 95–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, W. D. (1964). The genetical evolution of social behavior. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 7, 1–51.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hartman, A., & Laird, J. (1990). Family treatment after adoption: common themes. In D. M. Brodzinsky, & M. D. Schechter (Eds.), The psychology of adoption (pp. 221–239). Oxford University Press.

  • Hofferth, S. L., & Anderson, K. G. (2003). Are all dads equal? Biology versus marriage as a basis for paternal investment. Journal of Marriage and Family, 65(1), 213–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofferth, S. L., Pleck, J. H., & Vesely, C. K. (2012). The transmission of parenting from fathers to sons. Parenting, 12(4), 282–305.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hofferth, S. L., Flood, S. M., & Sobek, M. (2019). American time use survey data extract builder (2.7) [Data set]. https://doi.org/10.18128/D060.V2.7

  • Hopcroft, R. L. & Martin, D. O. (2016). Parental investments and educational outcomes: Trivers–Willard in the US. Frontiers in Sociology, 1, 1–3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsin, A., & Felfe, C. (2014). When does time matter? Maternal employment, children’s time with parents, and child development. Demography, 51(5), 1867–1894.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., Krueger, A. B., Schkade, D. A., Schwarz, N., & Stone, A. A. (2004). A survey method for characterizing daily life experience: the day reconstruction method. Science, 306(5702), 1776–1780.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • King, V., Boyd, L. M., & Thorsen, M. L. (2015). Adolescents’ perceptions of family belonging in stepfamilies. Journal of Marriage and Family, 77(3), 761–774.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, J., & Zhou, M. (2014). The success frame and achievement paradox: the costs and consequences for Asian Americans. Race and Social Problems, 6(1), 38–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundberg, S. (2005). Sons, daughters, and parental behaviour. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 21(3), 340–356.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malm, K., & Welti, K. (2010). Exploring motivations to adopt. Adoption Quarterly, 13(3–4), 185–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mancillas, A. (2006). Challenging the stereotypes about only children: a review of the literature and implications for practice. Journal of Counseling & Development, 84(3), 268–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marlowe, F. (1999). Showoffs or providers? The parenting effort of Hadza men. Evolution and Human Behavior, 20(6), 391–404.

    Google Scholar 

  • McHale, S. M., Crouter, A. C., & Tucker, C. J. (2001). Free‐time activities in middle childhood: links with adjustment in early adolescence. Child Development, 72(6), 1764–1778.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, B. C., Fan, X., Christensen, M., Grotevant, H. D., & Van Dulmen, M. (2000). Comparisons of adopted and nonadopted adolescents in a large, nationally representative sample. Child Development, 71(5), 1458–1473.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, K. S., Booth, A., & King, V. (2009). Adolescents with nonresident fathers: are daughters more disadvantaged than sons? Journal of Marriage and Family, 71(3), 650–662.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Moe, T. M. (2001). Who would choose private schools? Education Next, 1(1), 17–29. https://www.educationnext.org/hidden-demand/

  • Moon, U. J., & Hofferth, S. L. (2016). Parental involvement, child effort, and the development of immigrant boys’ and girls’ reading and mathematics skills: a latent difference score growth model. Learning and Individual Differences, 47, 136–144.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Moroni, G., Nicoletti, C., & Tominey, E. (2019). Child socio-emotional skills: the role of parental inputs. IZA Discussion Paper, No. 12432.

  • Pattillo-McCoy, M. (1999). Black picket fences: privilege and peril among the black middle class. University of Chicago Press.

  • Petta, G. A., & Steed, L. G. (2005). The experience of adoptive parents in adoption reunion relationships: a qualitative study. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 75(2), 230–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, B., Hamilton, L., Manago, B., & Cheng, S. (2016). Implications of changing family forms for children. Annual Review of Sociology, 42, 301–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Price, J. (2008). Parent–child quality time does birth order matter? Journal of Human Resources, 43(1), 240–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Price, J., & Kalil, A. (2018). The effect of mother-child reading time on children’s reading skills: evidence from natural within-family variation. Child Development, 90(6), e688–e702. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13137.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Quadlin, N. (2017). Funding sources, family income, and fields of study in college. Social Forces, 96(1), 91–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raley, S., & Bianchi, S. (2006). Sons, daughters, and family processes: does gender of children matter? Annual Review of Sociology, 32, 401–421.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riley, N. E., & Van Vleet, K. E. (2011). Making families through adoption. Sage Publications.

  • Ruggles, S. Flood, S., Goeken, R., Grover, J., Meyer, E., Pacas, J. & Sobek, M. (2020). IPUMS USA (10.0) [Data set]. IPUMS.

  • Santos-Nunes, M., Narciso, I., Vieira-Santos, S., & Roberto, M. S. (2018). Adoptive versus mixed families: child adjustment, parenting stress and family environment. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 27(6), 1858–1869.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sayer, L. C., Bianchi, S. M., & Robinson, J. P. (2004). Are parents investing less in children? Trends in mothers’ and fathers’ time with children. American Journal of Sociology, 110(1), 1–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slauson-Blevins, K., & Park, N. K. (2016). Deciding not to adopt: the role of normative family ideologies in adoption consideration. Adoption Quarterly, 19(4), 237–260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steelman, L. C., Powell, B., Werum, R., & Carter, S. (2002). Reconsidering the effects of sibling configuration: recent advances and challenges. Annual Review of Sociology, 28(1), 243–269.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweeney, M. M. (2010). Remarriage and stepfamilies: strategic sites for family scholarship in the 21st century. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72(3), 667–684.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, K. J. (2016). Adoption, foreign‐born status, and children’s progress in school. Journal of Marriage and Family, 78(1), 75–90.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, K. J., & Larsen Gibby, A. (2019). Adoption status and disparities in the familial configurations of children. Journal of Family Issues, 40(4), 464–487.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wikle, J. S., Ackert, E., & Jensen, A. C. (2019). Companionship patterns and emotional states during social interactions for adolescents with and without siblings. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 48(11), 2190–2206.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Werum, R., Davis, T., Cheng, S., & Browne, I. (2018). Adoption context, parental investment, and children’s educational outcomes. Journal of Family Issues, 39(3), 720–746.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zick, C., Bryant, W. K., & Österbacka, E. (2001). Mother’s employment, parental involvement, and the implications for children’s behavior. Social Science Research, 30(1), 25–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zosky, D. L., Howard, J. A., Smith, S. L., Howard, A. M., & Shelvin, K. H. (2005). Investing in adoptive families: what adoptive families tell us regarding the benefits of adoption preservation services. Adoption Quarterly, 8(3), 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Family Life, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA

    Ashley Larsen Gibby & Jocelyn S. Wikle

  2. Department of African and African Diaspora Studies, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA

    Kevin J. A. Thomas

Authors
  1. Ashley Larsen Gibby
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jocelyn S. Wikle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kevin J. A. Thomas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Data cleaning was performed by all authors and analysis was performed by A.L.G. and J.S.W. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Ashley Larsen Gibby and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ashley Larsen Gibby.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Informed Consent

Our study used publicly available secondary data from the U.S. Census Bureau. We used the American Community Survey, which is required by law for participants to complete.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gibby, A.L., Wikle, J.S. & Thomas, K.J.A. Adoption Status and Parental Investments: A Within-sibling Approach. J Child Fam Stud 30, 1776–1790 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-021-01975-7

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-021-01975-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation