The Un-Making of the Family of Origin: Adoption Social Workers as Intermediaries

  • Riitta Högbacka


Högbacka examines the process whereby the family of origin is disaggregated, starting with the role of adoption social workers as representatives of the wider adoption system. The position of adoption social work is first placed in the context of changing understandings and realities of social work in South Africa. The chapter then considers how adoptions are facilitated and investigates the interactions between (white) social workers and (black) first mothers in the context of lacking resources. It also pays attention to the notions of family applied in the adoption process.


Black Woman Child Welfare Foster Care Extended Family Nuclear Family 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Blackie, D. (2014). Sad, mad and bad: Exploring child abandonment in South Africa. Master’s Thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Witwaterstrand, March 2014. Accessed 12 Oct 2016.
  2. Bray, R., Gooskens, I., Kahn, L., Moses, S., & Seekings, J. (2010). Growing up in the new South Africa: Childhood and adolescence in post-apartheid Cape Town. Cape Town: Human Sciences Research Council.Google Scholar
  3. Cantwell, N. (2014). The best interests of the child in intercountry adoption. Florence: Innocenti Insight and UNICEF Office of Research. Accessed 12 Oct 2016.Google Scholar
  4. Drower, S. J. (2002). Conceptualizing social work in a changed South Africa. International Social Work, 45(1), 7–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gerrand, P., & Nathane-Taulela, M. (2015). Developing a culturally relevant adoption model in South Africa. International Social Work, 58(1), 55–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hall, K., Meintjes, H., & Sambu, W. (2014). Demography of South Africa’s children. In S. Mathews, L. Jamieson, L. Lake, & C. Smith (Eds.), South African Child Gauge 2014. Cape Town: Children’s Institute, University of Cape Town. Accessed 12 Oct 2016.
  7. Hunter, M. (2010). Love in the time of AIDS. Inequality, gender, and rights in South Africa. Bloomington/Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Jamieson, L., Wakefield, L., & Briedé, M. (2014). Towards effective child protection: Ensuring adequate financial and human resources. In S. Mathews, L. Jamieson, L. Lake, & C. Smith (Eds.), South African child gauge 2014. Cape Town: Children’s Institute, University of Cape Town. Accessed 12 Oct 2016.
  9. Leifsen, E. (2013). Child circulation in and out of the secure zone of childhood: A view from the urban margins in Ecuador. Childhood, 20(3), 307–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Leshkowich, A. M. (2012). Rendering infant abandonment technical and moral: Expertise, neoliberal logics, and class differentiation in Ho Chi Minh city. Positions: East Asia Cultures Critique, 20(2), 497–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ministry for Welfare and Population Development. (1997). White Paper for Social Welfare: Principles, Guidelines, Recommendations, Proposed Policies and Programmes for Developmental Social Welfare in South Africa, Notice 1108 of 1997. Pretoria: Government Printers.Google Scholar
  12. Ong, A. (2003). Buddha is hiding: Refugees, citizenship, and the New America. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  13. Penn, H. (1999). How should we care for babies and toddlers? An analysis of practice in out-of-home care for children under three. Childcare Resource and Research Unit, Centre for Urban and Community Studies, Occasional Paper 10. Accessed 12 Oct 2016.Google Scholar
  14. Penn, H. (2009). The parenting and substitute parenting of young children. In G. Bentley & R. Mace (Eds.), Substitute parents. New York/Oxford: Berghahn Books.Google Scholar
  15. Pratt, M. L. (1992). Imperial eyes. Travel writing and transculturation. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Schmid, L., & Patel, L. (2014). The interaction of local and international child welfare agendas: A South African case. International Social Work. doi:  10.1177/0020872813516477.
  17. Seekings, J., & Moore, E. (2013). Kin, market and state in the provision of care in South Africa. CSSR working paper no. 327. Cape Town: Centre for Social Science Research, University of Cape Town.Google Scholar
  18. United Nations General Assembly. (2010). Guidelines for the alternative care of children. A/ Res/64/142. New York: United Nations Human Rights Council,, accessed 9 Oct 2016.
  19. Wilson, K. (2011). ‘Race’, Gender and neoliberalism: Changing visual representations in development. Third World Quarterly, 32(2), 315–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Riitta Högbacka
    • 1
  1. 1.University of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland

Personalised recommendations