This review examines what is known about those who choose to become single adoptive parents. The demographic and personal characteristics of single parents who adopt are reviewed and the experiences of single parents with the children the), adopt are summarized.

Adoption of special-needs children is relatively new. The Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980 (Public Law 96-272) was passed, in pan, to encourage agencies to take prompt, decisive actions to place children permanently with other families when they cannot be returned to their biological families 1see Maluccio and Fein 19831. However, Tatara [19881 estimates that of the 35,000 to 39,000 children legally free for adoption in 1985, over half were in substitute care and awaiting adoptive placement. Furthermore, almost half of the children remaining in substitute care waiting for placement have one or more special needs: they are over the age of six, have a disability, are minorities, or are a member of a sibling group. While special-needs status poses some severe obstacles to adoption, the finding that over half of these children persist in substitute care brings under scrutiny the effectiveness of current practices to place special-needs children in permanent homes.

To address this problem, attention should focus on the development of resources for permanent placement of children in adoptive homes. This article reviews the available literature on single persons who adopt and argues that agencies should increase their recognition and recruitment of this nontraditional form of the family as a resource for the adoption of children with special needs.

As used here, a single parent is one who adopts as a single mother or father; those parents who adopt as a couple and later divorce are not characterized as single parents. The former made a conscious decision to be a parent as a single adult while the latter became single parents as a result of life circumstances. This review examines what is known about those who choose to become single adoptive parents. The demographic and personal characteristics of single parents who adopt are reviewed first; then the studies that have dealt with the experiences of single parents with the children they adopt are summarized.

Table i presents a summary of the studies reporting family composition in adoptions that occurred between 1970 and 1988. The percent of single-parent families varied greatly. The percent of placements with single parents ranges from a low of .5% reported by Branham in 1970 to a high of 34% reported by Festinger in 1986. It should be noted that Barth and Berry ]1988] conducted a two-tiered study, thus their listing has two samples. The initial part of their study involved case records (n = 927) and the second part of the study involved interviews (n = 120).

It is clear from table I that there was an increase in the percentage of single-parent adoptions in the studies conducted in the 1980s compared to the studies in the 1970s. The studies in the 1980s indicate at least double the number of adoptions by single parents reported in the 1970s, and Festinger's study [1986], over eight times the highest percent in the 1970s [Boneh 1979]. That is not to say that twice as many single parents were adopting in the 1980s as in the 1970s; sampling strategies influence these percentages to some degree. These studies do show, however, that the number of single parents who adopted over the past 20 years has dramatically increased.

Although the percent of single-parent adoptive families is variable and has increased, it is not comparable to the percent of single-parent households in the general population. In the 1970s, approximately 13% of all households were single-parent families, a number that doubled in the 1980s to approximately 26% [see Marls 1988]. In three of the studies conducted in the 1980s, the percent of single adoptive parents is similar to the percent of single parents in the general population [Boyne et al. 1984; Festinger 1986; Kagan and Reid 1986]. In the other seven studies reviewed it is much lower. This may indicate that recruitment efforts focused on single adults to adopt special-needs children have not been as successful as efforts to recruit two-parent families, a deficiency that may contribute to the problem of children remaining in foster care with no permanent adoptive home.

Like most one-parent households in the general population, most single adoptive parent households are female [Branham 1970; Feigelman and Silverman 1977; Dougherty 1978; Shireman and Johnson 1976, 1985]. Even in the studies that do not report the gender of single parents, there is some indication that a majority of single-parent adopters are women [Boneh 1979; Urban Systems 1985; Barth and Berry 1988].

Several studies report on other attributes of single adoptive parents. Branham [1970] indicates that single parents have a high level of emotional maturity, have a high capacity for frustration tolerance, and are not overly influenced by other opinions. Other studies [Jordan and Little 1966; Shireman and Johnson 1976] have noted single parents' enjoyment of children and the personal fulfillment they receive from interaction with their children.

Single parents tend to have lower incomes than two-parent adoptive families [Shireman and Johnson 1976; Feigelman and Silverman 1977; Shireman 1988]. The higher incomes in two-parent families are mostly the result of dual incomes. The incomes of single-parent families are lower because women are overrepresented in single-parent families and women in nearly every occupational category earn less than men performing similar functions.

In addition to a demographic profile of the adoptive parents, several studies reported on selected characteristics of the adopted children whom single parents accept into their homes. Reid et al. [19871 indicate that single parents wish to adopt an older child rather than an infant. Barth et al. [1988] and Barth and Berry [ 19881 indicate that single parents are more likely than couples to adopt older children, more likely to adopt boys, and less likely to adopt siblings or to have been a foster parent who adopted their foster child. In contrast to Barth and Berry [1988], Shireman and Johnson [1976] and Feigelman and Silverman [1977] suggest that singles tend to adopt children of the same sex as themselves. It is unclear whether the contradiction in findings is due to agency policy, which historically has emphasized same sex placement, or if single adoptive parents choose to adopt a child of the same sex as themselves.

In summary, single parents are responsible for an increasing number of special-needs adoptive placements. Most single parents are female, are more likely to adopt older children, and are less likely to adopt sibling groups or be a foster parent who adopted a child. Furthermore, they have lower incomes than couples,

Disruption refers to the removal of a child from the adoptive home before legalization of the adoption. The percent of disruptions is estimated to range from less than 3% [see Kadushin and Seidl 1971; Nelson 1985] to over 50% [see Rosenthal et al. 1988], and to have a high positive correlation with the age of the child at placement [Kadushin and Seidl 1971; Bass 1975; Feigelman and Silverman 1983; Zwimpfer 1983; Cohen 1984; Tremitiere 1984; Boyne et al. 1984; Groze 1986; Rosenthal et al. 1988]. Current estimates indicate that approximately 10% to 13% of all adoptive placements disrupt.

Table 2 presents the disruption rate for single parents and compares it to the percent of single-parent adoptions and the disruption rate for the entire sample. In some studies the disruption rate reported in table 2 is very high [e.g., Boneh 1979; Barth and Berry 1988]; these high percentages were due, however, to sampling strategies employed by the researchers.

Most studies [Boyne et al. 1984; Urban Systems 1985; Festinger 1986; Kagan and Reid 1986; Barth and Berry 1988; Barth et al. 1988] found that single parents were equally represented in both disrupted and intact adoptions. Urban Systems [1985] collected data from five states on the characteristics of children and their adoptive parents involved in disrupted adoptions. Their report indicates that single parents constituted 8% of the adoptive placements and 9% of the disruptions. Boyne et al. | 1984] analyzed data on special-needs children placed for adoption by Spaulding for Children in New Jersey between 1975 and 1981. They indicate that 20% of placements involve single parents and about 26% of disruptions involve single parents, a difference that is not statistically significant, indicating that single-parent placements were no more likely to disrupt than placements with couples. Festinger [1986] used a computerized listing to generate a sample of children over the age of six in New York City, 34% of whom were placed with single parents. Of the latter, 88.5% were placed with single mothers and 11.5% with single fathers. The nonmarried status made no difference in adoption outcome.

Kagan and Reid [1986] collected data through interviews with social workers and child care workers who had been closely involved with adoptive families, 23% of whom were single parents. Data were collected on 78 older youths placed between 1974 and 1982 in Albany, New York. Fifty-three percent of the youths experienced a disruption before legalization in at least one adoptive placement. Although the authors did not indicate the disruption rate for single parents, they report no significant difference in outcomes for single adoptive parents and for married adoptive parents. Their results, however, indicate an interaction between parent gender and child gender. Single women who adopted boys did not experience positive adoptive outcomes; only one of six boys placed with a single mother remained in adoptive placement at the time of the study. Barth and Berry [1988] analyzed data collected by adoption workers on 927 children placed between 1980 and 1984 in California. Single parents represented 15% of the placements and 14% of the disruptions. They found that single-parent adoptions were no more prone to disruption than adoptions by two-parent families. Overall, the results from these studies are positive about placement with single parents, indicating that marital status was unrelated to disruption.

Two studies, however--Boneh 1979 and Partridge et al. 1986--indicate that single parents were more likely to experience a disruption. Analyzing case records, Boneh sampled 90% of all disruptions occurring in a northeastern state public welfare agency between 1970 and 1978, and compared this sample to a random sample of legalized adoptions during the same period. She reports that five of the six single-parent adoptions in the samples experienced disruption, that is, a disruption rate of 83%. As she indicates, however, this result must be viewed with caution since the number of cases was small. Partridge et al. [1986] collected data from six adoption agencies on all disruptions occurring during a 16-month period from 1982-1984 and on one of every four intact placements initiated during the same time frame. They report that 53 or 72% of the disrupted adoptions involved two-parent families, compared to I I or 28% of the disruptions that occurred in single-parent families. However, there appears to be a miscalculation in their results. Fiftythree out of 64 cases of disrupted adoption is 83%, not 72%, as they report. On the basis of their analysis, they conclude that married couples experience fewer disruptions. Regenerating the results from the information presented in their table 3.16 [page 48], recomputing the chi-square analysis results in a chi-square that is not statistically significant. This reestimation calls into question their conclusion that there is a relationship between marital status and adoption outcome.

Although the other studies reviewed are not exempt from criticism of their methodology, a pattern appears that indicates that marital status has little, if any, effect on adoption outcome as it relates to disrupted or intact adoptions. It then becomes important to examine the experiences of single adoptive parents.

Only a few studies have focused on the experiences of single adoptive parents. Jordan and Little [1966] were the first to report on single-parent adoptive homes. They examined the placement in California of eight children with single adoptive mothers. They report that the mothers had an "above-average child orientation," had an ability to give of themselves, were not possessive of their children, and were capable of developing a healthy relationship with their children. They had strong positive opinions about single-parent adoptive placements and the development of the adopted child, reporting steady improvement of the children in their adoptive homes.

Several years later, also in California, Branham [1970] examined the experiences of single parents by gathering data from the case records of 36 oneparent adoptive placements. Thirty-five of the parents were women and 77% were nonwhite (the one man who adopted was black). Branham indicates that most of the single parents had relationships with other children before adopting a child, either through their own families or through their employment. She concludes that the children adopted by single parents had found "familiness" and that single-parent families were one resource helping to close the gap between the number of special-needs children waiting for placement and permanency in a family.

Feigelman and Silverman [1977] compared the adjustment of children adopted by two-parent and single-parent families through the use of a mailed questionnaire taken from a national sample (60% response rate). Fifty-eight single adoptive parents [43 females, 15 males] were compared to an unspecified subsample of couples. There were no significant differences in how single and dual parent families rated their child's physical or emotional health, growth, and development. There was, however, a significant relationship between single-parents' positive ratings of their children and the support given to them by their extended family; 80% of the single parents whose own parents responded positively to their adoptions judged their adopted children to have excellent adjustments, as compared to only 40% among those whose parents responded with indifferent, mixed, or negative reactions. There was also some indication that friends played a role analogous to that of the extended family. Feigelman and Silverman conclude that single parents have experiences substantially similar to those of the adoptive couples in raising their children, and therefore support single-parent adoptions.

In 1981, Feigelman and Silverman [ 1983] recontacted 60% of their sample (n = 35); seven or 47% of the single fathers and 28 or 65% of the single mothers were in the follow-up study. Because of the limited number of single fathers, no separate subgroup analysis was conducted. Six years after the initial study, Feigelman and Silverman reported that adoptive adjustments among the children raised by single parents were similar to the patterns of adjustment for children raised by adoptive couples.

Dougherty [1978] mailed a questionnaire that contained both multiplechoice and open-ended items to 131 single women who had adopted children. Sixty-seven percent responded to the questionnaire; 82 or 63% of the questionnaires were used in her analysis. Two-thirds of the children adopted had characteristics that labeled them as being hard to place. Dougherty found that these women possessed personal maturity, were highly educated, and were successful in their individual fields. They were aware of their own needs as well as the needs of their children and had built personal support systems for themselves in the community.

To date, only one longitudinal study has been conducted with single parents as the focus [Shireman and Johnson 1976; Shireman and Johnson 1985, 1986; Shireman 1988]. Thirty-one single parents who had adopted children under three years of age were in the initial sample. Eighteen parents were interviewed when the children were four or five years old to examine the development of the children and the stresses the families had undergone. Single parents reported many problems right after placement, a difficulty attributed to anxiety made more severe because they were new parents and had to deal with the child alone. An initial concern expressed by the researchers was the extreme isolation some of the families were experiencing and the intensity of the relationship between parent and child [Shireman and Johnson 1976]. The researchers concluded that some of the single-parent homes demonstrated the ability to handle crisis and stress as well as provide a positive climate for a child's development, while others seemed to present risks for the child. Their judgment was one of guarded optimism.

Four years later, when the children were eight years old, the experiences of black children placed with single parents were compared to transracial placements of black children and the placement of black children with black couples [Shireman and Johnson 1985, 1986]. Most parents in all three groups owned their own homes, and about one-third of the single parents had relatives in their homes who helped with child care and household responsibilities. Almost all the single parents worked full-time and were the sole wage earners in their household. The incomes of the traditional adoptive families were comparable to the incomes of the transracial families, with both being higher than the incomes of single parents. The isolation of single parents lessened with the children's entry into school. Over half of the single parents were highly involved in school activities and these activities were their major involvement in the community, compared to less than one-third of the other adoptive parents, who were involved in school activities as well as many other community activities. Overall, most of the children were doing well and were judged by the interviewers to be accomplishing the major developmental tasks appropriate to their age. About one-fifth of the children were having difficulty, with the adjustment of boys being more problematic than that of girls. Among the children of single parents, there were few problems With sexual or racial identity. Shireman and Johnson [ 1985, 1986] determined that single parents had skillfully managed the logistics of child care, home, and work, but expressed concern over the excessive closeness of the parentchild relationship, particularly as the child entered adolescence and needed to change the nature of the intimacy between parent and child.

At the last interview, when the adopted children were in early adolescence, only 15 single adoptive parents could be located [Shireman 1988]. Single adoptive parents were compared to single biological parents, traditional adoptive families, two-parent biological families, and transracially adopting families. There were methodological difficulties because sample loss was unequal across groups and sampling of comparison groups was not random. Thus, the results reported must be viewed with caution and considered only preliminary.

Five areas were explored in the last interview: family relatedness, peer relations, gender identity, school performance, and self-esteem. When adopted children in early adolescence were compared to a representative group of nonadopted children, there were no significant differences between them. Overall, the children were judged as doing well, and those with problems in one area showed strength in other areas.

The results of Shireman and Johnson's longitudinal study [1988] demonstrated that adoption, particularly adoption by a single person, was an appropriate strategy for these children who could not grow up with biological parents. These adoptive homes provided continuity and stability, the family systems showed strength and changed appropriately, and most adopted children did well.

In the studies reviewed here, single-parent families were found to be as nurturing and viable as dual-parent families. In fact, single-parent adoption emerged as a good plan for children. Studies that focused only on adoptive single-parent families indicate that these families and their children function well. Singles make up a significant portion of the population, and a number of single people are raising children on their own. Single adoptive parents are not only a feasible but an untapped resource for children with special needs, a recommendation suggested by Kadushin [1970] almost two decades ago. Not only are they a competent resource, but as Feigelman and Silverman [ 1983] indicate, waiting to be adopted may have an adverse adjustment impact on the child but being adopted by a single parent does not appear to have a detrimental effect.

Although the two-parent family is the most familiar way to rear children and is usually considered the best of all possible choices for an adoptable child, there are instances in which a two-parent family is not likely to be available or a two-parent family is not in the best interests of a child. One advantage: a one-parent family is better than a temporary placement in a foster home or an institutional setting [Kadushin 1970]. A second benefit is the meeting of needs of some children who may be denied adoptive placement as well as the meeting of needs of some parents [Kadushin 1970]. It is also an advantage that a single adult, unencumbered with the demands of a marital relationship, can give the kind and amount of involvement and nurturance that some children who have had severely damaging experiences need [Mendes 1979]. For children who need intense and close relationships with an adult, single-parent homes may be particularly appropriate. For some children such a close bond may meet their needs and be a step toward normal development [Shireman and Johnson 1985].

Here is strong evidence that single-parent families can meet the needs of some children now denied adoption and assist the child welfare system in providing permanent homes for children waiting for adoptive placement. What is lacking is more comprehensive research on singles who adopt special-needs children; it is time to investigate in more detail the experiences of single parents who adopt special-needs children, and generate policies for actively recruiting single adults as adoptive parents.

TABLE I Family Composition in Special-Needs Adoption Studies

Study                 Year            Sample

Branham                1970            ...
Grow and Shapiro       1974            125
Boneh                  1979            160
McRoy and Zurcher      1983             60
Boyne et al.           1984            273
Nelson                 1985            177
Urban Systems          1985            197
Festinger              1986            183
Partridge et al.       1986            230
Kagan and Reid         1986             78
Unger et al.           1988             56
Barth and Berry        1988            927
                                       120

Study                 % Single Parents       % Female

Branham                   5% (n = 40)           97%
Grow and Shapiro          2% (n = 3)[*]        100%
Boneh                     4% (n = 6)[*]        ....
McRoy and Zurcher         8% (n = 5)[*]        100%
Boyne et al.             20% (n = 56)[*]       ....
Nelson                   17% (n = 30)[*]        98%
Urban Systems             8% (n = 16)[*]       ....
Festinger                34% (n = 51)[*]        88%
Partridge et al.         14% (n= 32)[*]        ....
Kagan and Reid           23% (n= 18)[*]        ....
Unger et al              11% (n = 6)[*]        ....
Barth and Berry          15% (n = 137)         ....
                         13% (n= 12)           ....

[*]secondary analysis of data .... data not reported

TABLE 2 Disruption Rates for Single Parent Adoptions

LEGEND

A = % Single Parents Adopt
B = % Single Parents Disrupt
C % Sample Disruptions

Study               Year       A        B       C

Boneh               1979       4%      83%     51%
Boyne et al.        1984      20%      26%     23%[*]
Nelson              1985      17%      ---      3%
Urban Systems       1985       8%       9%     13%
Festinger           1986      34%      ---      8%
Partridge et al.    1986      14%      20%     27%
Kagan and Reid      1986      23%      ---     53%
Barth and Berry     1988      15%      14%     10%

[*] secondary analysis of data .... data not reported

Bass, C. "Matchmaker-Matchmaker: Older-Child Adoption Failures." CHILD WELFARE LIV, 7 (July 1975): 505-512.

Barth, R. P.; Berry, M.; Yoshikami, R.; Goodfield, R. K.; and Carson, M. L. "Predicting Adoption Disruption." Social Work 33, 3 (May-June 1988): 227-233.

Barth, R.P., and Berry, M. Adoption and Disruption: Rates, Risks, and Response. New York: Aldine De Gruyter, 1988.

Boneh, C. Disruptions in Adoptive Placement: A Research Study. Boston, MA: Massachusetts Department of Public Welfare, Office of Research Evaluation, 1979.

Boyne, J.; Denby, L.; Kettenring, J. R.; and Wheeler, W. The Shadow of Success: A Statistical Analysis of Outcomes of Adoptions of Hard-to-Place Children. Westfield, NJ: Spaulding for Children, 1984.

Branham, E. "One Parent Adoptions." Children 17, 3 (May-June 1970): 103-107.

Cohen, J. S. "Adoption Breakdown with Older Children." in Adoption: Current Issues and Trends, edited by Paul Sachdev. Toronto: Butterworth and Company, 1984.

Dougherty, S. "Single Adoptive Parents and Their Children." Social Work 23, 4 (July 1978): 311-314.

Feigelman, W., and Silverman, A. R. "Single Parent Adoptions." Social Casework 58, 7 (July 1977): 418-425.

Feigelman, W., and Silverman, A. R. Chosen Children: New Patterns of Adoptive Relationships. New York: Praeger Publishers, 1983.

Festinger, T. Necessary Risk: A Study of Adoptions and Disrupted Adoptive Placements. New York: Child Welfare League of America, 1986.

Groze, V. "Special-Needs Adoption." Children and Youth Services Review 8, 4 (1986): 363-373.

Jordan, V., and Little, W. "Early Comments on Single-Parent Adoptive Homes." CHILD WELFARE XLV, 9 (November 1966): 536-538.

Kadushin, A. "Single-Parent Adoptions: An Overview and Some Relevant Research." Social Service Review 44, 1 (March 1970): 263-274.

Kadushin, A., and Seidl, F. "Adoption Failure--A Social Work Postmortem." Social Work 16, 3 (July 1971): 32-38.

Kagan, R. M., and Reid, W. J. "Critical Factors in the Adoption of Emotionally Disturbed Youths." CHILD WELFARE XVI, 1 (January 1986): 63-73.

Maluccio, A. N., and Fein, E. "Permanency Planning: A Redefinition." CHILD WELFARE LXII, 3 (May-June 1983): 195-201.

Maris, R. W. Social Problems. Chicago, IL: The Dorsey Press, 1988.

Mendes, H. A. "Helping Adoptive Single-Parent Families." Social Work Papers of the School of Social Work 15 (Fall 1979), University of Southern California, Los Angeles.

Nelson, K. A. On the Frontier of Adoption: A Study of Special-Needs Adoptive Families. New York: Child Welfare League of America, 1985.

Partridge S.; Hornby, H.; and McDonald, T. Legacies of Loss, Visions of Gain: An Inside Look at Adoption Disruptions. Portland, ME: University of Southern Maine, Human Services Development Institute, 1986.

Reid, W. J.; Kagan, R. M.; Kaminsky, A.; and Helmer, K. "Adoption of Older Institutionalized Youth." Social Casework 68, 3 (March 1987): 140-149.

Rosenthal, J.; Schmidt, D.; and Conner, J. "Predictors of Special-Needs Adoption Disruption: An Exploratory Study." Children and Youth Services Review 10, 2 (1988): 101-17.

Shireman, J. Growing Up Adopted: An Examination of Some Major Issues. Chicago, IL: Chicago Child Care Society, 1988.

Shireman, J., and Johnson, P. "Single Persons as Adoptive Parents." Social Service Review 50, I (March 1976): 103-116.

Shireman, J., and Johnson, P. "Single-Parent Adoptions: A Longitudinal Study." Children and Youth Services Review 7, 4 (1985): 321-334.

Shireman, J., and Johnson, P. "A Longitudinal Study of Black Adoptions: Single Parent, Transracial, and Traditional." Social Work 31, 3 (May-June 1986): 172-176.

Tatara, T. Characteristics of Children in Substitute and Adoptive Care: A Statistical Summary of the VCIS National Child Welfare Data Base. Washington, DC: The American Public Welfare Association, 1988.

Tremitiere, B. Disruption: A Break in Commitment. Available from Tressler-Lutheran Service Associates, 25 W. Springettsbury Avenue, York, PA 17403, 1984.

Urban Systems Research and Engineering. Evaluation of State Activities with Regard to Adoption Disruption. Washington, DC: Urban Research and Engineering, 1985.

Zwimpfer, D. M. "Indicators of Adoptive Breakdown." Social Casework: The Journal of Con-temporary Social Work 64, 3 (March 1983): 169-177.

(Address requests for a reprint to Vic Groze, Assistant Professor, School of Social Work, University of Iowa, Iowa City Iowa 52242.)

~~~~~~~~

By VIC GROZE

Vic Groze, Ph.D., is Assistant Professor, School of Social Work. University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA.