“Being one, but not being the same”: A dyadic comparative analysis on ethnic socialization in transcultural foster families in the Netherlands

Abstract

To gain insight into ethnic socialization by ethnic majority foster parents who take care of ethnic minority foster youth, we conducted a comparative dyadic analysis, based on 16 foster parent‐foster youth dyads. Outcomes show that foster parents' first concern was providing a safe environment for their foster youth, and not ethnic minority socialization. Foster parents seem to strive to belong together as one family with their foster youth. As part of those efforts, they would incorporate ethnicity differences, and/or struggles with how to address them. This occurred in a reciprocal socialization process with their foster youth. Next, although foster youth could experience discrimination, there seems to exist a relative silence about this issue in foster families. Results furthermore show that birth parents may play a role as connectors with the ethnic backgrounds of the foster youth. Foster parents may need guidance by foster care agencies in learning how to address ethnicity issues openly, teaching their foster youth how to survive in a society where ethnic minority discrimination occurs, and involving birth parents in the ethnic socialization of the youth.

Full text

ORIGINAL ARTICLE
“Being one, but not being the same”: A dyadic comparative
analysis on ethnic socialization in transcultural foster families
in the Netherlands
Clementine J. Degener
1
| Diana D. van Bergen
2
| Hans W. E. Grietens
3,4
1
Department of Social Work, Rotterdam
University of Applied Sciences, Rotterdam,
Netherlands
2
Department of Pedagogics, University of
Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
3
Special Education Research Unit, KU Leuven,
Leuven, Belgium
4
Department of Special Needs Education and
Youth Care, University of Groningen,
Groningen, Netherlands
Correspondence
Clementine Degener, Rotterdam University of
Applied Sciences, Museumpark 40, 3015 CX
Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Email: c.j.degener@hr.nl
Funding information
Netherlands Organisation for Scientific
Research, Grant/Award Number: 023.008.022
Abstract
To gain insight into ethnic socialization by ethnic majority foster parents who take
care of ethnic minority foster youth, we conducted a comparative dyadic analysis,
based on 16 foster parent-foster youth dyads. Outcomes show that foster parents'
first concern was providing a safe environment for their foster youth, and not ethnic
minority socialization. Foster parents seem to strive to belong together as one family
with their foster youth. As part of those efforts, they would incorporate ethnicity
differences, and/or struggles with how to address them. This occurred in a reciprocal
socialization process with their foster youth. Next, although foster youth could expe-
rience discrimination, there seems to exist a relative silence about this issue in foster
families. Results furthermore show that birth parents may play a role as connectors
with the ethnic backgrounds of the foster youth. Foster parents may need guidance
by foster care agencies in learning how to address ethnicity issues openly, teaching
their foster youth how to survive in a society where ethnic minority discrimination
occurs, and involving birth parents in the ethnic socialization of the youth.
KEYWORDS
cultural competence, ethnic socialization, foster families, transcultural placements
1|INTRODUCTION
In Northern American and Western European countries, youth with
ethnic minority backgrounds are overrepresented in the foster care
system (Barn & Kirton, 2012; Brown et al., 2009). For instance in
2013, 23% of all Dutch children had an ethnic minority background,
while 36% of all Dutch foster children belonged to an ethnic minority
group (Gilsing et al., 2015). People with ethnic minority backgrounds
in the Netherlands mostly have non-western migration backgrounds.
This means that they (first generation) or one of their parents (second
generation) were born in African, Latin American, Asian countries
(Indonesia and Japan excluded) or Turkey (Centraal Bureau voor de
Statistiek, 2020). People whose grandparents migrated to the Nether-
lands (third generation) officially do not have a migration background
(Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek, 2020). This article uses the term
‘ethnic minorities’and includes second and third-generation people
who have ethnic roots in non-western countries. Because most non-
kinship foster parents have an ethnic majority Western-European
background, transcultural foster care placements frequently occur
(Day & Bellaart, 2015).
Internationally, there are discussions about children being tran-
sculturally placed. Central to these discussions is whether a child can
sufficiently explore his or her ethnic minority identity, when socialized
by parents with different ethnic backgrounds (Barn & Kirton, 2012;
Received: 31 August 2020 Revised: 16 May 2021 Accepted: 2 June 2021
DOI: 10.1111/cfs.12861
This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any
medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
© 2021 The Authors. Child & Family Social Work published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Child & Family Social Work. 2021;1–9. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/cfs 1

Wainwright & Ridley, 2012). A Dutch example is a boy of Turkish
descent who was placed in a Dutch foster family with an ethnic
majority lesbian couple and focused on whether this boy could suffi-
ciently explore his ethnic-Turkish identity. The discussion started from
the viewpoint of the Turkish community in The Netherlands, and was
picked up by the media and the Turkish and Dutch governments. As a
result of this particular discussion, Dutch foster care agencies tried to
reach out for potential foster parents from non-western migrant
groups. However, in practice, it proved hard to bind these groups to
their organizations (Day et al., 2018).
A literature review on ethnic identity and ethnic socialization of
transculturally placed foster youth showed a scarcity of research and
yielded no studies from mainland Europe. However, the included
studies show that foster youth may for instance struggle with being
disconnected from their ethnic backgrounds, which may lead to eth-
nicity losses. Foster parents who pay efforts towards participating and
engaging their foster youth in activities that promote children's cul-
tural development, and teach their foster youth in dealing with dis-
crimination are perceived as important in the process of ethnic
identity development of ethnic minority foster children (Degener
et al., 2021). In order to provide more insight into ethnic socialization
in transcultural foster families, we conducted a dyadic comparative
analysis to investigate what ethnic socialization messages foster
parents give, what ethnic socialization messages their foster youth
receive and how these messages interact.
2|ETHNIC IDENTITY AND ETHNIC
SOCIALIZATION
Following Umaña-Taylor et al. (2014), we define ethnic identity as a
multidimensional, psychological construct that reflects the beliefs and
attitudes individuals have about their ethnic group memberships, as
well as the processes by which these beliefs and attitudes develop
over time. Review studies show that ethnic identity is positively
related to psychosocial functioning, academic and mental health out-
comes of ethnic minorities (Rivas-Drake et al., 2014; Smith &
Silva, 2011). Some empirical studies present results which also prove
the contrary. For instance, a longitudinal study by Umaña-Taylor
et al. (2012) shows that for Mexican-origin male adolescents ethnic
identity emerged as a risk factor. Adolescents who reported higher
ethnic identity affirmation tended to have lower grades at school
1 year later. A possible reason given by the authors (Umaña-Taylor
et al., 2012), was that Mexican-origin male adolescents who feel most
positively about their ethnicity may underperform in a way that is
consistent with existing stereotypes about their group.
Ethnic identity is fluid and develops over time through a process
of exploration and commitment (Phinney & Ong, 2007). This
process occurs in daily dynamic interactions with others, like parents
and peers (Huguley et al., 2019; LaFromboise et al., 1993; Umaña-
Taylor et al., 2014). Ethnic socialization, which is conceptualized as
the range of parental efforts aiming at transmission of messages about
ethnicity to children, contributes to ethnic identity development
(Hughes et al., 2008). These messages may include transmission of
traditions, customs, cultural pride and language (cultural socialization),
or focus on preparation for experiences with racism and prejudice in
society. Especially cultural socialization has proved to be positive for
the ethnic identity development of ethnic minority youth (Hughes
et al., 2009; Huguley et al., 2019). Nuances can be found concerning
how ethnic socialization may influence youth's ethnic identity.
Preparation for experiences with racism and prejudice, can for
instance strengthen youth in coping with discrimination (Richardson
et al., 2015; Schmitt et al., 2003), but may also instal thoughts in the
youth's minds concerning societal ethnic stereotypes, and undermine
a process of positive ethnic identity development (Hughes
et al., 2009; Huguley et al., 2019).
3|ETHNIC SOCIALIZATION AND
CULTURAL COMPETENCE OF PARENTS
WITH TRANSCULTURALLY PLACED
CHILDREN
The definition of Hughes et al. (2008) is based on ethnic socialization
of children who live in their birth parental homes. In the last decen-
nium, growing attention has been paid to ethnic identity and ethnic
socialization of transculturally placed children, mainly adoptees
(Umaña-Taylor & Hill, 2020). Contrary to adoption, foster youth may
have a more vivid connection with their birth network, as is mostly
encouraged by foster care agencies. This may imply that foster youth
receive ethnic socialization from their birth parents or other birth fam-
ily members as well (Mitchell Dove & Powers, 2018). Furthermore,
many foster youth are traumatized because of a history of abuse and
neglect in their birth homes, and/or due to having experienced several
out of home placements (Mitchell, 2017). Nevertheless, knowledge
from adoption studies may be helpful for better understanding of
ethnic socialization in transcultural foster care placements.
Studies show that the way adoptive parents ethnically socialize
their children impacts their children's ethnic identity (DeBerry
et al., 1996; Hu et al., 2017). A cumulative complexity may exist con-
cerning ethnic socialization of transculturally placed adoptees, as they
need to deal with two ethnic backgrounds in their lives: the ethnic
minority backgrounds of their birth parents, and the ethnic majority
backgrounds of their adoptive parents (Manzi et al., 2014). The
authors (Manzi et al., 2014) suggest that transculturally placed
adoptees who manage to integrate their heritage culture (ethnic
minority) and adopted country culture (ethnic majority) in their lives,
show less behavioural problems. However, most studies solely focus
on the way as to how adoptive parents address the ethnic minority
backgrounds of their children. These studies show that adoptive
parents in general pay little attention to their children's ethnic minor-
ity backgrounds (Umaña-Taylor & Hill, 2020). Nevertheless, the ways
as to how they may approach the ethnic backgrounds of their
children, may vary from “colourblindness”to active incorporation of
minority ethnicity messages in daily socialization practices
(Barn, 2013; DeBerry et al., 1996; Langrehr et al., 2016). Furthermore,
2DEGENER ET AL.

according to Barn and Kirton (2012), adoptive parents can miss practi-
cal or emotional knowledge to guide transculturally placed children in
their ethnic identity development. In this light, several authors investi-
gated the concept of “cultural competence”(Langrehr et al., 2016;
Lee et al., 2018; Vonk et al., 2010). Cultural competence refers to
adoptive parent's ability to prepare their children for racism and to
help them survive in a society where discrimination occurs (Langrehr
et al., 2016; Lee et al., 2018; Vonk, 2001). Cultural competence also
refers to skills adoptive parents need to reinforce feelings of ethnic
minority pride (Langrehr et al., 2016), and “multicultural planning,”
which includes the ability to expose ethnic minority children to con-
tacts and activities with people of their ethnic minority background
(Vonk, 2001). Few studies address cultural competence of foster par-
ents. These studies especially focus on cultural receptivity as a cultural
competency skill, which refers ethnic majority foster parents' ability of
having positive, learning and open interactions about ethnicity with
foster youth (Brown et al., 2009; Coakley & Gruber, 2015;
Daniel, 2011).
4|ETHNIC SOCIALIZATION IN FOSTER
CARE AS A RECIPROCAL PROCESS
Ethnic identity formation is a reciprocal process, which develops
through daily dynamic interactions with others (LaFromboise
et al., 1993; Umaña-Taylor et al., 2014). Transculturally placed fos-
ter youth may react to ethnic socialization messages given by their
ethnic majority foster parents. Vice versa, foster parents may react
on needs and messages concerning ethnicity, addressed by their
ethnic minority foster youth. Thus, like ethnic identity formation,
ethnic socialization may be a reciprocal process between foster
parents and their foster youth. To get insight into the dynamics of
ethnic socialization in transcultural foster families, we address the
following research question: What ethnic socialization do foster
parents give and what ethnic socialization do transculturally placed
foster youth receive by their foster parents, and how do both
perspectives interact?
5|METHODS
5.1 |Design
We followed a constructivist paradigm, whereby we tried to under-
stand how people make sense of, and interpret their experiences
in life. We thereby treated each account of every participant as
indicative of the subjective reality of that individual (Denzin &
Lincoln, 2005). The use of a dyadic comparative analysis enabled
us to study the accounts of the foster youth and their foster
parents, how both perspectives may interact, and what overarching
themes can be found when comparing all dyads (Ribbens
McCarthy et al., 2003; Sands & Roer-String, 2006; Van Parys
et al., 2017).
5.2 |Participants
In 16 families, we interviewed 14 foster mothers and two foster
fathers, eight boys and eight girls. Based on their parents' or grand-
parents' countries of birth, foster youth were selected as ethnic
minorities. They had Northern-African (3), Eastern-African (4),
Southern-American (6) or bi-cultural (3: majority/minority (1) and
minority/minority (2)) backgrounds, and were age 11 to 19. The foster
parents had Western- European ethnic majority backgrounds and their
age varied between approximately 40 and 70 years old. All foster youth
had contacts with members of the birth family network, and 13 foster
youth had contacts with their birth parents on a regular base. Their
placement age ranged from 2 weeks to 12 years, but due to several
out of home placements prior to the current placement, only two of
the foster youth could call back memories of living with birth parents.
5.2.1 | Recruitment
Foster families were recruited using purposive sampling via nine fos-
ter care agencies with a geographical spread throughout the Nether-
lands. Foster care workers informed foster families who were selected
by the researcher via personal information letters. As a result,
12 families (approximately one out of nine selected families) signed up
for participation. Other foster families were recruited using snowball
sampling, as well as via a call put out on social media and on a website
for foster parents.
5.3 |Research procedure
We held reflexive meetings on a four-weekly basis with the research
team whereby we discussed and reflected on the research process.
We thereby provided rich descriptions of all steps that were made.
5.3.1 | Instruments
We developed a photo-elicitation manual for foster youth and inter-
view topic lists for foster youth and foster parents, which consisted of
questions on ethnic socialization (Hughes et al., 2008). We established
credibility by discussing and piloting the instruments before the
empirical fieldwork started. To enable participants to show their own
perspectives, both parties were interviewed separately from each
other (Eisikovits & Koren, 2010; Reczek, 2014). Foster youth were
asked to take pictures in advance of every interview to encourage talk
and to bridge cultural differences (Harper, 2002). These pictures were
meant to show people, places, activities or things that were of impor-
tance to them. The foster youth brought their selection of pictures to
the interviews. Conversations about the pictures, could lead to a con-
versation about ethnic socialization. For example, a picture of a plate
of food (for instance, rice and chicken), led to a conversation about
what kind of food the foster parents prepared and whether they
DEGENER ET AL.3

prepared food which was related to the ethnic background of the fos-
ter youth. The researcher followed the foster youth in their story,
keeping the topic list in mind. In the interviews with foster parents,
we did not use pictures. However, also during these interviews, the
researcher followed the foster parents in their stories, which was also
guided by a topic list. The interviews were first structured by topics
about the foster family and socialization in general, which led to
in-depth questions about the role of (minority or majority) ethnicity in
their socialization messages.
5.3.2 | Interview procedure
A first appointment was made to introduce the study. During this
meeting, we explained the aims and procedures, and made follow-up
appointments for conducting the interviews. Participants personally
signed letters of informed consent. The legal guardians of youth under
16 signed letters of informed consent via email.
Foster youth and most foster parents were interviewed in their
homes by the same interviewer (who is also the first author) whereby
we ensured confidentiality. Two interviews with foster parents took
place at the foster parents' workplace. The interviews took on average
1 h. All interviews were transcribed verbatim. A summary of each
transcript was sent to the participants and we included their com-
ments or extra information in our analysis.
5.4 |Analysis
We conducted a dyadic comparative analysis within and between fos-
ter families (Ribbens McCarthy et al., 2003; Sands & Roer-
String, 2006; Van Parys et al., 2017).
5.4.1 | Step 1. Inductive analysis of individual
accounts
We started with an inductive analysis of each individual account,
whereby we followed the steps of thematic coding (Flick, 2014, p.
424–428). First, we coded the interview of the foster parent, and
clustered the codes in conversation themes. To avoid fragmentation, a
short narrative of each interview was written (Van Parys et al., 2017).
We repeated this process for the account of the foster youth.
5.4.2 | Step 2. Dyadic analysis within families
To explore how two individuals within the same foster family con-
structed similar or different realities, we started a dyadic analysis
within families. Following Eisikovits and Koren (2010), Ribbens
McCarthy et al. (2003) and Sands and Roer-String (2006), we com-
pared and interpreted gaps, similarities and differences for each con-
versation theme that appeared within each family. When a foster
parent mentioned a theme or a specific subject the foster youth did
not mention, or vice versa, we labelled this as “gap.”“Similarities”
occurred when foster parents' and foster youth narratives concerning
ethnic socialization were similar on a descriptive level as well as on an
interpretative level. We used the label ‘difference’when participants
within a dyad told similar stories, but interpreted these stories in a dif-
ferent way or vice versa (Eisikovits & Koren, 2010).
5.4.3 | Step 3. Dyadic analysis between families
After analyzing five dyads, we started to synthesize from a “within
families”level to a “between families”level, whereby we searched
for overarching themes (Ribbens McCarthy et al., 2003; Sands &
Roer-String, 2006; Van Parys et al., 2017). We first developed a
thematic structure by comparing the conversation themes of the
dyadic analysis of our first five families. Then, we continued our
inductive analysis (step 1 and 2), and simultaneously compared the
outcomes systematically with our thematic structure. During the
process, we refined and broadened the set of conversation themes
(Van Parys et al., 2017). This resulted in four conversation themes,
which cover and summarize the major conversation topics of the
foster parents and their foster youth concerning ethnic socialization:
Providing a safe and stable environment of foster youth (1),
ethnicity approaches (2), silence about discrimination (3) and the
efforts foster parents make to involve birth parents in the ethnic
socialization of foster youth (4).
5.4.4 | Step 4. Dyadic comparative analysis of
conversation themes
In order to understand the gaps, similarities and differences con-
cerning ethnic socialization between families, we started to study and
compare the accounts of the dyads in each of the aforementioned
conversation themes. In Section 6 we balanced between authenticity
and recognizability (Forbat & Henderson, 2003). To preserve
authenticity, we mostly quoted contributions of both members from
one family. To decrease recognizability, we used pseudonyms and
referred to foster parent, instead of foster father or foster mother.
6|RESULTS
6.1 |Theme 1. Providing a safe and stable
environment for foster youth
Foster parents' primary socialization concern was not ethnic socializa-
tion, but providing a stable, safe, peaceful and loving home for their
foster youth, who often had experienced a history of trauma and
abuse and out of home placements. The following example of a foster
parent illustrates this: “Our socialization was mainly based on his
background. Not on his cultural background, but on everything he
4DEGENER ET AL.

suffered from in the past.”Similar to his foster parent, Omar (16) said
that his foster parents mainly looked after him and helped him to
address the behavioural problems he used to have.
6.2 |Theme 2. Ethnicity approaches
We identified five ethnicity approaches in the narratives of foster par-
ents and their foster youth. These approaches were not strictly
divided. Some of these approaches could occur together (like “ambiv-
alence”and “explaining differences in ethnicity terms”), or showed
some overlap (like “humanitarian”and “active engagement”).
6.2.1 | Paying no attention to minority ethnicity
Similarly to narratives of their foster youth, some foster parents
mentioned that they did not pay attention to the ethnic minority
background of their foster youth. Foster youth added that they did
not wish to receive any attention concerning their ethnic minority
backgrounds, which may show a reciprocal relation. An example of
this approach could be recognized in the foster family of Azizi (age
12), who resided in a non-diverse area. Azizi lost contact with her
birth parents, but saw some of her siblings on a regular base. Azizi
had no wish that any attention would be paid to her ethnic back-
ground. According to her, this kind of attention was “unnecessary.”
She furthermore said: “They raised me. I came here when I was
two, so it is just normal for me here. Maybe it would have been
different when I was ten and you enter a family where people are
not the same.”Her foster parent told a similar story: “We never
paid attention to her background …. she doesn't even know it her-
self …(silence) ….”
6.2.2 | Humanitarianism
Humanitarian foster parents expressed the value of all individuals as
human beings. Although these foster parents and their foster youth
mentioned to be involved in ethnic minority socialization practices like
introducing cultural traditions or customs in the foster homes, foster
parents actively valued “the person”above ethnicity. Vice versa,
foster youth shared humanitarian views during the interviews which
may show a mutual interaction between the foster parents and their
foster youth. The following example shows a foster mother and her
foster daughter Salma, (12) who lived in an ethnic diverse area. Salma
visited her birth mother frequently, and had little contact with
extended family members. The foster mother said: “When I think of
what makes your identity, I also think what makes you who you are?
Ethnic background is very important, but in my eyes there is a more
essential layer behind it”. Salma (age 12), stated: “It doesn't matter
that I look different than other people in The Netherlands, but that I
feel at home among people …. and this (points at her arm) is just a
piece of skin with some hair on it.”
6.2.3 | Ambivalence
Foster parents could be ambivalent towards the minority ethnicity
of their foster youth. They acknowledged, yet struggled how to
pay attention to ethnicity differences between themselves and
their foster youth. They, as well as their foster youth reported no
or few ethnic socialization practices during the interviews. A
possible reason was foster parents' ideal of belonging to each
other as family members. Foster parents posed questions about
whether they—as a foster family—could truly belong to each other,
when they highlighted ethnicity differences. The following example
shows a foster family who lived in an ethnic homogeneous area.
The foster son, Romano (14) had sometimes contact with his birth
mother and siblings. He felt different than others. He did not like
this, and therefore expressed a firm wish to be “white.”Further-
more, he said that he did not long for attention concerning his
ethnic minority background. He, and the foster parent both told,
that little attention was paid to the ethnic minority background of
Romano in the foster family. The foster parent thereby struggled
whether more attention should be paid to the foster son's minority
ethnicity, and said: “It is always his skin color that comes to the
surface, you know. I sense that he always feels different. I wonder
if it will ever be normal that he belongs to us.”
6.2.4 | Active engagement
Foster parents could tell how they, mainly in interaction with
their foster youth expressed ethnicity needs, actively engaged with
the foster youth ethnic background. Foster youth who still had
memories of living in their birth families, were found in the group of
actively engaged foster parents. This might show a reciprocal rela-
tion between foster parents and their foster youth, who already
might have developed a sense of ethnic minority identity before
they entered the foster family. Examples of ethnic socialization
included searching for friends with similar ethnic backgrounds in the
neighbourhood, or travelling to the foster youth birth country.
These involvements were similar to the narratives of foster youth,
who also expressed the importance of ethnicity in their lives. Valery
(17) for example mentioned that she followed a Papiamento
(Caribbean language) course together with her foster parent,
because she wanted to travel to her birth parents' country. The
foster family wherein she lived, was situated in an ethnic diverse
city. Valery had contact with her birth mother on a frequent basis.
Similar to Valery, the foster parent said: “We followed a
Papiamento course, and it was her wish to do this together.”
6.2.5 | Explaining differences in ethnicity terms
Foster parents could express doubts concerning experienced
differences between themselves and their foster youth, especially
when it concerned in their eyes “negative”behaviour of the foster
DEGENER ET AL.5

youth. They questioned, whether they could explain this behaviour
of their foster youth in ethnicity terms. No foster youth told about
having received these kind of messages, which may show that the
foster parents did not express their thoughts or doubts. The follow-
ing example shows a foster family who lived in an ethnic homoge-
nous area. Alba (12) sometimes had contact with his birth mother
and siblings. During the interview, he firmly expressed that he
belonged to the foster family. He also stated that he experienced
differences concerning his temperament between himself and the
environment he lived in, which he did not relate to his ethnic
background: “I am just a rough person. I am in fights more often
than others and I shout at people.”The foster parent shared the
followin thoughts about specific behaviour of Alba, who was
frequently involved in fights at school:
It might also be related to being a foster child. For me,
it is painful to sense that he is different. You will never
know where it comes from. But generally, I think it is
his ethnic background.
6.3 |Theme 3. Silence about discrimination
Foster parents told that they knew or suspected that the foster
youth could experience discrimination outside of the foster family.
They thereby narrated about discriminative events which could
occur within the foster family. One of the foster parents said for
example: “They (biological children) shout during a fight: ‘You are
just stupid brown (sic)’or something like that …. (silence)”. In con-
trast to the foster parents, no foster youth talked about discrimina-
tion experiences from within their foster families, but similar to the
narratives of foster parents, they mentioned discrimination experi-
ences outside of the foster family. Omar (16 years old) narrated for
example about being teased at school because of his Turkish
descent. He lived in an ethnic diverse city and actively posed
himself the question to what ethnic group he belonged. This
question was troubled by his peers with ethnic-Dutch backgrounds,
who according to him neglected him: “Well they are just racists. I
mean …. Well I don't know if I can say that …. (silence), but they
always run away from me.”
Both the foster parents and foster youth told, that they hardly
talked about discrimination experiences together, which may mean,
that there was a relative silence around this topic within the foster
families. For instance, Can (16) lived in an ethnic homogenous area.
He narrated frequently about discrimination experiences at the
streets, like being called “foreigner”in a negative way, and said
that he never talked about the subject with his foster parents, for
they “would not understand him”. The foster parent of Can said:
“Not really, I don't think we pay attention to it (discrimination).
When he comes home and talks about it, I ask him what he did,
to provoke them, so that people would react to him in that way,
you know.”
6.4 |Theme 4. Foster parents involve birth parents
in the ethnic socialization of foster youth
Establishing birth parental involvement was one of the most com-
monly mentioned ethnic socialization practices, mentioned by foster
parents. This was not recognized in the stories of the foster youth,
and might show that it involved foster parental efforts “behind the
scenes.”Foster parents undertook many activities in establishing or
strengthening contacts with birth parents, mainly, to keep ties with
the network of their foster youth. The foster parents furthermore told
that when contacts with birth parents were established or strength-
ened, birth parents could provide ethnic socialization requests to the
foster family. Foster parents explained about how they, as a result,
integrated wishes of birth parents in the daily lives of their foster
youth. The most common examples concerned food, like not prepar-
ing pork for their foster youth for religious reasons.
Furthermore, according to foster parents and their foster youth,
birth parents could serve as direct connectors with the ethnic back-
grounds of the foster youth, and some foster parents felt this was a
task where birth parents where irreplaceable. Zakiya (16), who saw
her foster mother on a frequent base, narrated for example about
how her birth mother taught her about her Antillean roots, while
Zakiya's foster parent said:
“A foster child may feel abandoned by its roots. I try to
fill that gap, but I cannot do that by myself. So I had a
lot of conversations with her mother, and this led to
trust in my relationship with Zakiya, but also in the
relationship between Zakiya and her mother”.
7|DISCUSSION
This study provides insight into ethnic socialization in Dutch foster
families from the perspectives of ethnic majority foster parents and
their ethnic minority foster youth. We recognized reciprocal relations
in ethnic socialization processes. Foster parents thereby seemed to
search for a balance between belonging to each other as a family, and
in the same time acknowledging differences. This notion inspired a
variety of approaches towards the ethnic backgrounds of their foster
youth. Some of these approaches linked back to the empirical work of
Barn (2013), DeBerry et al. (1996) and Langrehr et al. (2016), and var-
ied from paying no attention to the foster youth ethnic background,
to a possible “culturalization”of differences (Eliassi, 2015).
Other influences which seemed to play a role in the ethnic sociali-
zation processes in foster families were firstly, foster parents' primary
concern of providing a safe and stable environment for their foster
youth, and not listing ethnic socialization as a first goal. An explana-
tion may be that foster parents are mainly occupied with alleviating
foster youth behavioural problems, which also causes foster parents
to have relatively high stress levels (Maaskant et al., 2017;
Vanderfaeillie et al., 2012). Foster parents therefore may have little
6DEGENER ET AL.

emotional or practical space and time for ethnic socialization. Further-
more, some foster youth in our study were not very occupied with
their ethnic backgrounds; hence, this may go to show why their foster
parents in a response, did not actively pay attention to this issue. This
may be understood by the work of Tyrell et al. (2019), which shows
that childhood maltreatment and placement disruption leads to ethnic
identity losses of foster youth. It was beyond the goals of our study,
to explore this relation. However, possible childhood maltreatment
and the aftermath hereof, as well as past placement disruption experi-
ences might have played a negative role for foster youth ethnic iden-
tity development in our study.
Secondly, the participants narrated about discrimination as expe-
rienced by foster youth. Within the foster families however, little
attention was paid to discrimination experiences. The foster parents
therefore may miss skills to teach their foster youth how to survive in
a society where discrimination exists (Langrehr et al., 2016; Umaña-
Taylor & Hill, 2020; Vonk, 2001). On the other hand, foster parents
might also be cautious about addressing societal stereotypes and eth-
nicity discrimination, as it may lead to negative feelings about the way
youth perceive other people's attitudes towards them (see Hughes
et al., 2009).
Thirdly, birth parents seem to play a role in the ethnic
socialization of the foster youth, because the most commonly men-
tioned ethnic socialization practice was foster parents' efforts to
involve birth parents in the ethnic socialization of the foster youth.
This corresponds with the cultural competence skill “multicultural
planning”(Vonk, 2001). When birth parents were present in the foster
family's lives, they could serve as connectors with the ethnic back-
grounds of foster youth in the eyes of both foster parents and foster
youth. An important comment to make in this respect is that birth
parents can also impact foster youth identity negatively, for foster
youth may (re)experience a rejection when they have contact with
their birth parents (Moyers et al., 2006).
7.1 |Strengths and limitations
To the best of our knowledge, this the first study that shows ethnic
socialization in foster care from a dyadic perspective. In existing
studies about ethnic socialization in foster care the perspectives were
shown of foster parents, and no comparison between foster parent
and foster child perspectives existed (Brown et al., 2009; Coakley &
Gruber, 2015; Daniel, 2011).
We conducted an in-depth analysis within dyads whereby we
systematically compared outcomes of conversation themes between
dyads. This represents a strength of our study, because it contributes
to the scarce amount of dyadic analyses which provide “a bird's eye
view”of family processes (Ribbens McCarthy et al., 2003; Van Parys
et al., 2017).
In family-based research, where two or more family members are
interviewed, a double power-balance may exist between the
researcher, the parent and the youth (Reczek, 2014). Therefore, we
assured at the beginning of each interview that no information would
be shared with others. Nevertheless, participants in this study could
have expressed themselves less openly because of loyalties to each
other.
The interviewer tried to build a relationship with the interviewee
whereby different ethnic backgrounds of both parties may have
played a role. The interviewer had a Dutch ethnic majority back-
ground. Not, or partly sharing a same ethnic background with the fos-
ter youth may have led to a lesser sense of mutual understanding
(Adamson & Donovan, 2002). Therefore, we used pictures to bridge
possible ethnicity differences (Harper, 2002). On the other hand, not
sharing a same ethnic background could have encouraged a conversa-
tion in which topics about ethnicity or discrimination are not taken for
granted (Adamson & Donovan, 2002). In the interviews with the fos-
ter parents, the interviewer shared having an ethnic majority back-
ground. This could have led to a sense of mutual understanding and
trust, wherein foster parents showed their openness concerning their
doubts about ethnicity related matters.
Only foster families, whose members were willing to be inter-
viewed, participated in our study. Therefore, we might for example
have reached a group of ambivalent foster parents who were
struggling with ethnicity issues and posed questions around whether
and how they should pay attention to minority ethnicity. This makes
our results more difficult to generalize to a larger group of foster
parent-foster child dyads.
7.2 |Implications for practice and future research
As foster parents may struggle in how to address ethnicity issues
within foster families, they may need guidance by foster care agencies
in strengthening their skill of cultural receptivity (Brown et al., 2009;
Coakley & Gruber, 2015; Daniel, 2011), so they can address and
reflect on ethnicity issues openly, share their thoughts and doubts
with foster care workers and other foster parents, and learn from each
other's good practices. Furthermore, because a relative silence seems
to exist around discrimination related matters between foster youth
and their foster parents, foster parents might be better prepared to
assist their foster youth in dealing with discrimination. Because foster
youth may experience discrimination, it is important for them to learn
survival skills (Vonk, 2001). Moreover, foster parents may be guided
by foster care agencies in how to involve birth parents in socialization
processes in order to strengthen the process of foster ethnic identity
development in the foster youth.
Last, future research needs to be conducted in order to validate
our findings, contextualize them within a more ecological perspective
(Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Hochman et al., 2020) and to focus on how
foster parents may guide their transculturally placed foster youth in
the development of a bicultural identity (Manzi et al., 2014).
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to thank the foster families who welcomed us
in their homes, and shared their stories. This research was supported
by the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research, grant number
DEGENER ET AL.7

023.008.022. The research protocol was approved by the Ethics
Committee Pedagogical and Educational Sciences of the University of
Groningen in Fall 2016.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
We have no conflict of interest to disclose.
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
The data that support the findings of this study are available on
request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly
available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.
ORCID
Clementine J. Degener https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1093-358X
REFERENCES
Adamson, J., & Donovan, J. L. (2002). Research in black and white.
Qualitative Health Research,12(6), 816–825. https://doi.org/10.1177/
10432302012006008
Barn, R. (2013). Doing the right thing: Transcultural adoption in the USA.
Ethnic and Racial Studies,36, 1273–1291. https://doi.org/10.1080/
01419870.2013.770543
Barn, R., & Kirton, A. (2012). Transracial adoption in Britain politics,
ideology and reality. Adoption & Fostering,36(3–4), 25–37. https://doi.
org/10.1177/030857591203600304
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development, experiments
by nature and design. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Brown, J. D., St. Arnault, D., George, N., & Sintzel, J. (2009). Challenges of
transracial placements: Foster parent perspectives. Child Welfare,8,
103–127.
Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek. (2020). Jaarrapport integratie 2020.
CBS: Den Haag, Heerlen, Bonaire.
Coakley, T. M., & Gruber, K. (2015). Cultural receptivity among foster par-
ents: Implications for quality transracial parenting. Social Work
Research,39,11–21. https://doi.org/10.1093/swr/svu033
Daniel, E. (2011). Fostering cultural development, foster parents' perspec-
tives. Children and Youth Services Review,33, 2230–2240. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2011.07.005
Day, M., & Bellaart, H. (2015). De rol van Etniciteit, Cultuur en Religie in de
Pleegzorg. Verwey-Jonker Instituut: Een Verkenning. Utrecht.
Day, M., Distelbrink, M., Bellaart, H., & Sahraoui, A. (2018). Pleegzorg op
maat Onderzoek naar Werving en binding van Pleegzorg met een
Islamitische Achtergrond in Nederland. Utrecht: Verwey-Jonker
Instituut.
DeBerry, K. M., Scarr, S., & Weinberg, R. (1996). Family racial socialization
and ecological competence: Longitudinal assessments of African-
American transcultural adoptees. Child Development,67, 2375–2399.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1131629
Degener, C. J., van Bergen, D. D., & Grietens, H. W. E. (2021). The ethnic
identity of transracially placed foster children with an ethnic minority
background: A systematic literature review. Children and Society,00,
1–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/chso.12444
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Introduction: The discipline and prac-
tice of qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The
sage handbook of qualitative research (pp. 1–32). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications Ltd.
Eisikovits, Z., & Koren, C. (2010). Approaches to and outcomes of dyadic
interview analysis. Qualitative Health Research,20(12), 1642–1655.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732310376520
Eliassi, B. (2015). Constructing cultural otherness within the
Swedish welfare state: The cases of social workers in Sweden.
Qualitative Social Work,14(4), 554–571. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1473325014559091
Flick, U. (2014). An introduction to qualitative research (5th ed.). London:
Sage.
Forbat, L., & Henderson, J. (2003). “Stuck in the middle with you”: The
ethics and process of qualitative research with two people in an inti-
mate relationship. Qualitative Health Research,13(10), 1453–1462.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732303255836
Gilsing, R., Pels, T., Bellaart, H., & Tierolf, B. (2015). Grote Verschillen in
Gebruik Jeugdzorg naar Herkomst. Utrecht: Verwey-Jonker Instituut.
Harper, D. (2002). Talking about pictures: A case for photo elicitation.
Visual Studies,17(1), 13–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/
14725860220137345
Hochman, J., Segev, E., & Levinger, M. (2020). Five phases of dyadic
analysis: Stretching the boundaries of understanding of family relation-
ships. Family Process,59(2), 681–694. https://doi.org/10.1111/famp.
12466
Hu, A. W., Zhou, X., & Lee, R. M. (2017). Ethnic socialization and ethnic
identity development among internationally adopted Korean American
adolescents: A seven-year follow-up. Developmental Psychology,
53(11), 2066–2077. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000421
Hughes, D., Rivas-Drake, D., Foust, M., Hagelskamp, C., Gersick, S., &
Way, N. (2008). How to catch a moonbeam: A mixed-methods
approach to understanding ethnic socialization in ethnically diverse
families. In S. Quintana & C. McKnown (Eds.), Handbook of race, racism,
and child development. New Jersey: John Wiley.
Hughes, D., Witherspoon, D., Rivas-Drake, D., & West-Bey, N. (2009).
Received ethnic–racial socialization messages and youths' academic
and behavioral outcomes: Examining the mediating role of ethnic
identity and self-esteem. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority
Psychology,15(2), 112–124. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015509
Huguley, J. P., Wang, M., Guo, J., & Vasquez, A. C. (2019). Parental ethnic–
racial socialization practices and the construction of children of color's
ethnic–racial identity: A research synthesis and meta-analysis. Psycho-
logical Bulletin,145, 437–458. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000187
LaFromboise, T. D., Coleman, H., & Gerton, J. (1993). Psychological impact
of biculturalism: Evidence and theory. Psychological Bulletin,114,
395–412.
Langrehr, K. J., Thomas, A. J., & Morgan, S. K. (2016). Confirmatory evi-
dence for a multi-dimensional model of racial-ethnic socialization for
transracially adoptive families. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psy-
chology,22(3), 432–439. https://doi.org/10.1037/cdp0000081
Lee, J., Vonk, M. E., Han, J., & Jung, S. (2018). A path analysis of a cultural
and racial socialization model in international transracial adoption:
Racial awareness, self-efficacy, and socialization practices. Children
and Youth Services Review,85, 333–340. https://doi.org/10.1606/j.
childyouth.2018.01.002
Maaskant, A. M., van Rooij, F. B., Overbeek, G. J., Oort, F. J., Arntzl, M., &
Hermanns, J. M. (2017). Effects of PMTO in Foster families with chil-
dren with behavior problems: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of
Child and Family Studies,26, 523–539. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10826-016-0579-2
Manzi, C., Ferrari, L., Rosnati, R., & Benet-Martinez, V. (2014). Bicultural
identity integration of transracial adolescent adoptees: Antecedents
and outcomes. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,45(6), 888–904.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022114530495
Mitchell Dove, L., & Powers, L. E. (2018). Exploring the complexity of hair
and identity among African American female adolescents in foster
care. Children and Youth Services Review,95, 368–376. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.childyouth.2018.10.043
Mitchell, M. B. (2017). No one acknowledged my loss and hurt: Non-death
loss, grief and trauma in foster care. Child and Adolescent Social Work
Journal,35,1–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10560-017-0502-8
Moyers, S., Farmer, E., & Libscombe, J. (2006). Contact with family mem-
bers and itsimpact on adolescents and their foster placements. British
8DEGENER ET AL.

Journal of Social Work,36, 541–559. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/
bch270
Phinney, J. S., & Ong, A. D. (2007). Conceptualization and measurement of
ethnic identity: Current status and future directions. Journal of
Counseling Psychology,54, 271–281. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-
0167.54.3.271
Reczek, C. (2014). Conducting a multi member interview study. Family Pro-
cess,53(2), 318–335. https://doi.org/10.1111/famp.12060
Ribbens McCarthy, J., Holland, J., & Gillies, V. (2003). Multiple perspec-
tives on the ‘family’lives of young people: Methodological and theo-
retical issues in case study research. International Journal of Social
Research Methodology,6(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/
1364557011005933
Richardson, B. L., Macon, T. A., Mustafaa, F. N., Bogan, E. D.,
Cole-Lewis, Y., & Chavous, T. M. (2015). Associations of racial discrimi-
nation and parental discrimination coping messages with African
American adolescent racial identity. Journal of Youth and Adolescence,
44, 1301–1317. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-014-0196-6
Rivas-Drake, D., Markstrom, C., Syed, M., Lee, R. M., Umaña-Taylor, A. J.,
Yip, T., Seaton, E. K., Quintana, S., Schwarz, S. J., French, S., & Study
Group on Ethnic and Racial Identity in the 21th Century. (2014). Eth-
nic and racial identity in adolescence: Implications for psychosocial,
academic, and health outcomes. Child Development,85(1), 40–57.
https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12200
Sands, R. G., & Roer-String, D. (2006). Using data triangulation of mother
and daughter interviews to enhance research about families. Qualita-
tive Social Work,5(2), 237–260. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1473325006064260
Schmitt, M. T., Spears, R., & Branscombe, N. R. (2003). Constructing a
minority group identity out of shared rejection: The case of interna-
tional students. European Journal of Social Psychology,33,1–12.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.131
Smith, T. B., & Silva, L. (2011). Ethnic identity and personal well-being of
people of color: A meta-analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology,58,
42–60. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021528
Tyrell, F. A., Marcelo, A. K., Trang, D. T., & Yates, T. M. (2019). Prospective
associations between trauma, placement disruption, and ethnic-racial
identity among newly emancipated foster youth. Journal of Adoles-
cence,76,88–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2019.08.010
Umaña-Taylor, A. J., & Hill, N. E. (2020). Ethnic-racial socialization in the
family: A decade' s advance on precursors and outcomes. Journal of
Marriage and Family,82, 244–271. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12.
12622
Umaña-Taylor, A. J., Wong, J. J., Gonzales, N. A., & Dumka, L. E. (2012).
Ethnic identity and gender as moderators of the association between
discrimination and academic adjustment among Mexican-origin ado-
lescents. Journal of Adolescence,35, 773–786. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.adolescence.2011.11.003
Umaña-Taylor, A. J., Quintana, S. M., Lee, R. M., Cross, W. E., Rivas-
Drake, D., Schwartz, S. J., …Study Group on Ethnic and Racial Identity
in the 21th Century. (2014). Ethnic and racial identity during adoles-
cence and into young adulthood: An integrated conceptualization.
Child Development,85,21–39. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12196
Van Parys, H., Provoost, V., De Sutter, P., Pennings, G., & Buysse, A.
(2017). Multi family member interview studies: A focus on data
analysis. Journal of Family Therapy,39(3), 386–401. https://doi.org/10.
1111/1467-6427.12169
Vanderfaeillie, J., Van Holen, F., Trogh, L., & Andries, C. (2012). The impact
of foster children's behavioural problems on Flemish foster mothers'
parenting behaviour. Child and Family Social Work,17,34–42. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2206.2011.00770x
Vonk, M. E. (2001). Cultural competence for transracial adoptive parents.
Social Work,46(3), 246–255. https://doi.org/10.1300/sw/46.3.246
Vonk, M. E., Lee, J., & Crolley-Simic, J. (2010). Cultural socialization prac-
tices in domestic and international transcultural adoption. Adoption
Quarterly,13, 227–247. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926755.2010.
524875
Wainwright, J., & Ridley, J. (2012). Matching, ethnicity and identity, reflec-
tions on the practice and realities of ethnic matching in adoption.
Adoption & Fostering,36(3–4), 50–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/
030857591203600306
How to cite this article: Degener, C. J., van Bergen, D. D., &
Grietens, H. W. E. (2021). “Being one, but not being the
same”: A dyadic comparative analysis on ethnic socialization in
transcultural foster families in the Netherlands. Child & Family
Social Work,1–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/cfs.12861
DEGENER ET AL.9