Adventuring in Adoption. by Lee M. Brooks; Evelyn C. BrooksReview by: Cheney C. JonesSocial Forces, Vol. 18, No. 2 (Dec., 1939), pp. 301-302Published by: Oxford University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2570790 .

Accessed: 15/06/2014 20:25

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Oxford University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Social Forces.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.51 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 20:25:18 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

LIBRARY AND WORKSHOP 301

which has catalogued these two functions of government as separate, distinct, and at least antagonistic if not mutually exclusive. Let it be said of the authors that they do not believe politics and ad- ministration to be so divergent as to make it impossible of bringing them together.

It seems that despite the confession that we are not, however, devotees of a cult,

and what we seek is both good adminis- tration and democratically responsible government," the authors give consider- ably more argument, explicit or implied, to that school of thought which recog- nizes "the claims of the party for some patronage, but would draw the line be- tween patronage and the merit system at a point greatly diminishing the number of party appointments." It is their con- tention "that the parties now have too much patronage" and that "party pros- perity" is not inconsistent with an elim- ination of much patronage.

In the attempt to discover a possible readjustment between patronage and merit the authors see the future of democracy at stake. "Our best defenses against any and all such myths," they assert, "remain in our practical successes." The best chapter in the book is entitled "The Civic Art in America." In this chapter they set out to "expose the myth through which fascism, nazism and communism propose to cure the evils of an industrial age." They deny the validity of the techniques and objectives of these ideolo- gies. They deny that the choice before the American people is either fascism or communism. Rather they propose to get a maximum out of democracy as it is understood in America. The authors conclude: "To live and to let live-this is the tolerant maxim of a civic art that ties together our two skills and, tying them together in government, can perhaps save

democracy from its romantic enemies in these starkly realistic days."

RAY F. HARVEY New York University

ADVENTURING IN ADOPTION. By Lee M. Brooks and Evelyn C. Brooks. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, I939. Z07 pp. $1.oo.

Apparently the adoption of children has become a popular subject. Applica- tions for children for adoption appear in great numbers in the offices of child caring agencies and popular and scientific journals are publishing an assortment of good, bad, and indifferent articles. An inferior book which appeared last year caused much comment in the press. Now from a University Press we receive, Adventuring in Adoption. Probably this is a good title, as there is some adventure in the under- taking and it is not bad for prospective parents to approach it in that light. There is no doubt, as Professor Groves indicates in the foreword, that this book is needed and it will be useful to people who are thinking of adopting children. While this reviewer thinks that Professor Groves' foreword might be considered slightly over-commendatory, one must say that it is a good book and the reviewer agrees with a statement credited to the late Dr. Carl C. Carstens, that "the thilngs we would like to have said are in the book and all the safeguards that we stand for in adoption are included."

The more obvious propositions about adoption are that it is possible for it to be a very satisfactory relationship for all concerned. It is not, however, a ready-made and simple panacea for a de- pendent child's problems. It is an under- taking to be approached with caution and there are certain ways and means, with reasons for the same, which, if understood and followed, safeguard the undertaking.

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.51 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 20:25:18 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

302 SOCIAL FORCES

These fnain propositions or principles are adequately set forth in this pleasant book. Professor Groves is quite right when he says that the book is clear, and in the light of much that is being written, that is not faint praise. Practically any prospective parent who thinks of adopting would find this book readable. It is well to have the brief summary of the history and practice of adoption. It is fine to impress upon everyone the importance of caution, in the beginning, that the adoptive home itself is a fit place for a child. It is es- pecially good in Chapter Four to set forth so carefully all the proper steps in adoption and the reasons for same.

It is not quite clear to the reviewer what the authors gain, or thought they would gain, by putting this book practically in the form of two books, with a consider- able amount of repetition. It would seem that in Part II they had in mind writing a sort of handbook for practi- tioners, and yet it is not altogether that. The very good summary of adoption stat- utes and the few court forms might as well have been put with the annotated bibliography in a sort of an appendix. If this had been done, the rest of the ma- terial, with a little more work, might have been embodied in the first part of the book. Anyone who reads social work matter these days must be impressed with the wordiness of much of it. While Professor Groves commends the painstak- ing discerning scholarship of the book, the reader is bound to catch considerable repetition and to have the feeling that some further work might have been done upon the writing before it was given to the publisher. People who like their reading matter somewhat thinned out and repetitive, however, will like reading this book. There is enough warm emo- tion to make it pleasing to prospective parents who have been rather starved for

child-life in their homes, and yet it is not sentimental.

If, as Professor Groves indicates, the writers intended to go far into the "theo- retic and fundamental problems of con- cern to the serious student of adoption" they did not travel quite as far as it is possible to go, but probably no one is quite ready yet to do that. We are be- ginning to realize that there are subtleties in the emotional field in this matter, which not being understood, have re- sulted in disasters in adoption, even when the best methods set forth in this book have been followed.

Having said all of this, I wish to say that I think this book will serve well a fine purpose and I have already begun recommending it to adoptive parents, as well as to social workers. It should have a wide sale. It should be read particularly by some uninformed people who seem to be anxious to burst into print on this subject in journals and are saying a lot of foolish things. Editors of journals may take notice. Looking ahead, many people who will be adopted children will have cause to thank Mr. and Mrs. Brooks for this book.

CHENEY C. JONES

The New England Home for Little Wanderers

SE,VEN LEAN YEARS. By T. J. Woofter, Jr. and Ellen Winston. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, I939. I87 PP. $I.50. Il- lustrated.

For those who have followed the series of research monographs issued by the Division of Social Research, Works Prog- ress Administration, this present study of Woofter and Winston should prove a convenient summary of findings. For those others who have not become familiar with the monographs this should be a useful introduction to them. In no sense

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.51 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 20:25:18 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions