Amelia Blankenau

Using longitudinal data, this study investigated the association between parent racial colorblindness and discrimination toward children (reported by both parents and adolescents) in transracial, transnational adoptive families. Eighty White adoptive parents with adopted Korean children (ages 5-12 years old) were surveyed in 2007 (Time 1 [T1]), and both parents and adolescents (ages 13-19 years old) were surveyed in 2014 (Time 2 [T2]). Parents completed a self-report measure of parent racial colorblindness toward their child at T1 and T2, and parents and adolescents completed a measure of discrimination experienced by adoptees at T2. Parent reports of racial colorblindness toward their child were not significantly different between T1 and T2. However, parent reports of discrimination increased between time points. Further, parent and adolescent reports of discrimination were not significantly different from one another. Using hierarchical regression models, racial colorblindness among parents at T1 (when children were in middle childhood) was significantly associated with parent reports of discrimination experienced by adolescent children at T2, even when controlling for T2 racial colorblindness. This association did not hold for adolescent reports of discrimination. Adoptive parents' acknowledgment of their children's race and ethnicity appears relatively stable from childhood into adolescence, and parent racial colorblindness toward their own child can affect their ability to recognize discrimination during adolescent development, a vital period when discrimination becomes more common and salient. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

LGBTQ+ women have long been overlooked in sexual and reproductive health research. However, recent research has established that LGBTQ+ women have unique and specific needs that need to be addressed in order to improve effectiveness of sexual health education and practice with this historically and presently underserved population. Informed by a reproductive justice framework coupled with liberation psychology theory, this review discusses the current state of sexual and reproductive health and technologies among LGBTQ+ women. In particular, we focus on a range of HIV prevention and reproductive technologies and their use and promotion, including the internal condom, abortion, oral contraceptives, dapivirine ring, HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis, intrauterine device, and other less studied options, such as the contraceptive sponge. Grounded in an intersectional framing, this review acknowledges the intersecting systems of oppression that affect multiply marginalized women inequitably and disproportionately. A sociohistorical, critical lens is applied to acknowledge the well-documented racist origins of reproductive health technologies and ongoing coercive practices that have led to medical mistrust among marginalized and stigmatized communities, particularly racialized LGBTQ+ women, women with disabilities, and women who are poor or incarcerated. Moreover, we discuss the urgent need to center LGBTQ+ women in research and clinical care, community-engaged health promotion efforts, affirming non-heteronormative sexual health education, and health policies that prioritize autonomy and dismantle structural barriers for this population. We conclude with recommendations and future directions in this area to remedy entrenched disparities in health.

Adoption is frequently invoked as a universal social good—an uncomplicated win for adoptees, adoptive parents, and birth parents alike—that obviates the need for abortion. As antiabortionists weaponize adoption to attack reproductive rights, psychologists must recognize adoption as a key reproductive justice issue with significant, lifelong physical and psychological impacts, especially on adopted people and birth parents. Recognizing critical adoption studies as an application of a reproductive justice framework, we argue that psychologists must understand how adoption is both sustained by and reinforces structural inequality and global reproductive injustice. In a post- Roe reality, clinicians and researchers must critically examine adoption histories and myths in order to address the needs of the adoption triad. As an interdisciplinary team of researchers and clinicians in psychology; medicine; genetic counseling; and women's, gender, sexuality, and Asian American studies, we examine adoption's ties to settler colonialism, racism, classism, and imperialism and interrogate harmful dominant narratives about adoption. We then summarize clinical considerations for working with members of the adoption triad, future directions for research on adoption, and recommendations for both clinicians and researchers to advance adoption competence in the face of current attacks on reproductive rights in the United States.