Informal Kinship‐Based Fostering Around the World: Anthropological Findings

Abstract

Anthropological research around the world has documented informal, kinship-based foster care cross culturally. That research suggests that children are more likely to benefit from informal kinship-based fostering in cultural contexts where fostering expands the pool of relatives rather than substituting one parent for another, fostering is expected to provide children with positive opportunities for learning and development, and/or children are granted some autonomy or decision-making power. However, informal kinship-based fostering seems to place children at risk in cultural contexts where the process of children’s attachment to caregivers resembles the Western child development model, communities are highly stratified along socioeconomic lines, and/or exploitation of children is permitted. The article concludes with a discussion of implications for both research and policy.

A Developmental Analysis of Caregiving Modalities Across Infancy in 38 Low‐ and Middle‐Income Countries

“…Items were coded as 0 = no, 1 = yes. We included all caregivers because nonparents (siblings, grandparents, community members) may take active roles in infant caregiving in LMIC (Bornstein, ; Leinaweaver, ; Smith & Drew, ). Items went through forward‐translation of questionnaires (available in English, French, Spanish, Russian, and Arabic) into (major) local languages and then back‐translation by a separate translator without referring to the original questionnaires.…”

Introduction: the absent child and transnational families

“…The widespread prevalence of fostering globally (Leinaweaver 2014), or the increasing global incidence of parentchild separation, signals the importance of caregiving in the life of the absent child. Children demand care.…”

“…The nexus of absent children and mobility highlights the increasing normalization of absence in contemporary family lives writ large. The widespread prevalence of fostering globally (Leinaweaver 2014), or the increasing global incidence of parentchild separation, signals the importance of caregiving in the life of the absent child. Children demand care.…”

Vii. Gender in Low‐ and Middle‐income Countries: Reflections, Limitations, Directions, and Implications

“…Furthermore, MICS data might underestimate children’s experiences in the sense that actual numbers are probably greater because more individuals contribute to a child’s life than just the mother (or another principal female caregiver). In the “distributed model” of socialization, which may be more normative in LMIC, siblings and extended family as well as others contribute to child caregiving (Bornstein, 2015;Clarke-Stewart & Allthusen, 2002;Leinaweaver, 2014;Marfo, 2011;Smith & Drew, 2002;Zukow-Goldring, 2002). By limiting reports to those provided by a principal caregiver, the MICS may underestimate the amount and depth of experiences of children.…”