Celebrating Read Across America Day With Your Adopted Child

With the goal of motivating children to read and ultimately creating successful and life-long learners, over 50 organizations and over three million educators partner with the National Education Association to celebrate reading and provide materials and resources to help children continue to read 365 days a year! Through much research, we have learned that “children who are motivated and spend more time reading do better in school.”

The NEA’s website offers a wealth of resources to be able to celebrate throughout the month. Look for the following exciting and helpful resources: an opportunity for families to participate in a Facebook Live Event, an article noting book recommendations written by a diverse group of children’s book authors, a fun Share Your ‘Shelfie’ Challenge, reading resources for each month of the year, and much more!

Read Across America Day provides a great opportunity to introduce your adopted child to some great children’s books that they can relate to and enjoy!  Many are great tools to celebrate with your child their unique and beautiful adoption story. Perhaps you have a family member or friend preparing to adopt a little one—something like this would be a helpful and treasured gift. Below, we have provided some of the book titles that many adoptive families have enjoyed sharing with their children.

Children’s Books for Domestically Adopted Children:

A Blessing from Above: Patti Henderson

A Koala for Katie: Jonathan London

A Mother for Choco: Keiko Kasra

Did My First Mother Love Me: Kathryn Ann Miller

God Gave Us You: Lisa Tawn Bergren and Laura J. Bryant

Families are Forever: Deborah Capone

Horace (Reading Rainbow Book): Holly Keller

Is That Your Sister: Catherine and Sherry Bunin

Just in Case you Ever Wonder: Max Lucado

The Keeping Quilt: Patricia Polacco (September 1994)

Let’s Talk About It: Adoption: Fred Rogers

Little Miss Spider: David Kirk + A Christmas Wish

A Little Story About a Big Turnip: Tatiana Zunshine (ages 2-8)

Megan’s Birthday Tree: A Story about Open Adoption: Laurie Lears

My Special Someone: A Child’s Perspective of Adoption: Brittany and Sherry Kyle

The Mulberry Bird: Anne Braff Brodzinsky

Never, Never, Never Will She Stop Loving You: Jolene Durrant

Oliver: A Story About Adoption: Lois Wickstrom

Our Twitchy: Kes Gray and Mary McQuillan

Sam’s Sister: Juliet Bond

Tell Me Again About the Night I Was Born: Jamie Lee Curtis

Through Moon and Stars and Night Skies: Kristine Wise

 

Children’s Books for Internationally Adopted Children:

At Home in This World. . . A China Adoption Story: Jean MacLeod

Just Add One Chinese Sister: Patricia McMahon and Conor Clarke McCarthy

I Love You Like Crazy Cakes:  Rose A. Lewis

Moonbeams, Dumplings and Dragon Boats: A Treasury of Chinese Holiday Tales:  Nina Simonds, Leslie Swartz and The Children’s Museum, Boston

Waiting for May:  Janet Morgan Stoeke

Families Are Forever: Deborah Capone

Horace: Holly Keller

I Love You Like Crazy Cakes: Rose Lewis

Is That Your Sister?: Catherine and Sherry Bunin

Babies Come from Airports: Erin Dealey

 

Children’s Books for Transracially Adoption Children:

The Keeping Quilt: Patricia Polacco

Little Miss Spider: David Kirk

The Little Snowgirl: Carollyn Croll

A Little Story About A Big Turnip: Tatiana Zunshine

A Mother for Choco: Keiko Kasra

Over The Moon: Karen Katz

Seeds of Love: Mary Ebejer Peteryl

Three Cheers for Catherine the Great! : Cari Best

Through Moon and Stars and Night Skies: Kristine Wise

Adoption language: “parent” vs. “adoptive parent”

Adoption wordsOver at the Adoption Guide’s Advice page, I came across a document labeled “Accurate Adoption Language,” which links to a PDF entitled “Positive Adoption Language.” The fact sheet (reprinted from OURS Magazine, May/June 1992), has a fairly complete listing of preferred language (which it calls “positive”) and dispreferred language (called “negative”) for talking about adoption.

In general, I like the idea of using “positive adoption language.” (Frankly, calling it “accurate adoption language” strikes me as a little pompous and even disingenuous. It suggests that the “truth” about adoption is always positive and never negative. But that’s a topic for another post.) In spite of my general inclination to use positive language about adoption, some of the positive-negative pairs strike me as odd. One is the “parent” vs. “adoptive parent” contrast. Continue reading

But are they REALLY brothers?

In the video post that Dan just put up, theologian and adoptive dad Russell Moore relates some theological insights from the questions he was asked when he and his wife adopted from Russia. I’ve transcribed (quickly and roughly) a portion below, but I encourage you to watch the entire 3-minute video.

[When my wife and I began the process of adopting,] I found myself answering questions that really irritated me deeply. We had gone on our first trip to Russia and returned back and we had pictures, and we were showing people pictures of our boys.

The question we consistently were asked — it was two boys — was, “Well, are they brothers?” and my response was, “Well yes, they are now.”

And people who asked the question would say, “Yeah, but are they really brothers?”
Continue reading

Some thoughts on PC adoption language

This morning I read a short post over at Riley Dad’s Weblog which reminded me that I’ve been meaning to post about adoption language issues.

One of the first things that struck me when I started working at Carolina Hope in 2005 was the lingo. I was told there were certain things I wasn’t allowed to say (e.g., “real mother,” “children of their own” — and many other similar expressions!). Some of the language choices were intuitive, but others struck me as a bit over-reaching. PC, if you will.

My assumption about our blog’s audience is that most (but by no means all) of you are politically conservative. And if your experience in the conservative movement has been anything like mine, you’ve been taught that Politically Correct Language is a hallmark of sloppy liberal thinking which disguises the truth about people, institutions, and relationships. Conservatives, on the other hand, say what they mean, and use logically rigorous language. Right? I mean, come on! “Indian” was good enough for them a century ago. Why should I waste syllables saying “Native American” or (horror of horrors), actually care enough about a person to find out what tribe they’re a part of then refer to them as Cheyenne or Cherokee or Choctaw?

Well there, I’ve tipped my hand. You see, there are at least two good reasons for language we often dismiss as PC. Continue reading

Israel, God’s son through adoption

IsraelKidsAn important biblical theme often overlooked by Christians is the sonship of Israel. When we hear the expression, son of God, we think of Jesus (as we should), but we forget that the first son of God mentioned in Scripture is the nation of Israel.

Through the correspondence of two of Israel’s privileges listed in Romans 9:4 (“They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, and the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises.”), we learn that God adopted Israel as His son at Mt. Sinai when He gave Israel the law. Israel officially became God’s son through adoption when He constituted Israel a nation at Mt. Sinai.

It was common for ancient Near Eastern nations to boast of having a father-son relationship with their gods. Most ancient religions believed that the gods bore their sons through consorts. These nations considered themselves to be the “natural” born sons of their particular god(s). This was the religious and cultural context in which Israel entered into a Father-son relationship with God. The difference was that Israel entered into this relationship through adoption. Romans 9:4 makes that clear.

Although Israel was not a “natural” son of God, they were not to demean their adoptive sonship or consider it a second-class sonship in any way whatsoever. Rather, Israel was to cherish and value its adoptive sonship. They were not to look at the sonship status of the other nations and think of theirs as somehow inferior because they were adopted. In other words, Israel’s adoptive sonship was not to be viewed negatively at all, even though there would have been pressure from the surrounding nations to do so.

Given the religious and cultural context of the ancient Near Eastern world and Continue reading