Download issue (PDF) - Nieman Foundation - Harvard University

Words & ReflectionsReporting on Child Welfare and Adoption PoliciesAn author and advocate contends that journalists are missing the story.By Elizabeth BartholetAs an academic interested in socialreform, I appreciate both themedia’s power to influencechange and the complexity of their rolein reporting on tough policy issues.This appreciation is something I’vegained during the past decade as I’vetalked with a lot of members of theprint and broadcast press in my effortsto promote changes in child welfarepolicy. Reporters often call me for commentwhen stories relevant to my workemerge in the news, and I have chosento respond to their inquiries and toengage in ongoing public debates aboutthe issues I care about. Despite theoccasional frustration I experiencewhen I read, see or hear the product ofour conversations, it’s important to meto continue to work with members ofthe media. I know that significantchanges in public policy occur onlywhen there are fundamental shifts inthe mindset of policymakers and thebroader public. I also recognize theunique and critical capacity of the pressto inform and educate each of theseaudiences.In general, I have been impressed bythe commitment of many of the reportersI have dealt with over the years todelve deeply into the issues and towield responsibly their considerablepower to shape public opinion. I amfully aware that reporters should not“take sides,” but instead should gatherthe facts and report them fairly, givingthose in their audience the opportunityto assess for themselves the interpretationsof the facts and differentadvocacy positions. But I have beenfrustrated by the tendency of somereporters to reduce the multifacetedand complex reality of policy debate toa thin two-sided coin. Too often, reportersassume that once advocates ofElizabeth Bartholet with her sons Christopher and Michael.Photo by Lilian Kemp Photography.“both sides” of a particularissue have beenidentified and quoted,the full story will havebeen told. The risk inthis all-too-familiar reportingtechnique isnot only of undue simplificationbut also ofdistortion: The twosidedstory may notsimply omit some ofthe richness of the fullpicture, but mayproject a false image.I have two bookscoming out this falldealing with issuesthat illustrate theseproblems. “Nobody’sChildren: Abuse andNeglect, Foster Drift,and the Adoption Alternative,”and “FamilyBonds: Adoption,Infertility, and theNew World of ChildProduction” (originallypublished in1993 and now beingre-issued with a newpreface), will be releasedby Beacon Press in October. Myinteractions with members of the pressregarding the issues I write about showhow difficult it can be to communicateinformation about new policy perspectives,particularly when the facts arecomplex and the ideas run against thetide of conventional thought.“Nobody’s Children” constitutes achallenge to the orthodox views thatundergird today’s child welfare policy.In this book I question whether it isappropriate to think of and treat childrenas belonging essentially and exclusivelyto their kinship and racialgroups and as a result to lock them intowhat are often inadequate biologicaland foster homes, where they sufferharmful abuse and neglect. I call forthe elimination of racial and other barriersthat prevent children from beingplaced in appropriate adoptive homes.I contend that our policies should bechanged to encourage child welfareworkers to look not only to the local“village” but also to the broader communityto share responsibility for childrearing. I envision a society in which74 Nieman Reports / Fall 1999