1. 傳統親緣觀普遍存在於當代收養家庭之中，「無後不孝」的觀念仍影響其收養動機，且現代化之後對於親生小家庭的主流想像，更加深整體社會對於收養身世的隱匿態度。然而，當出現關乎分家與承繼之家族議題，收養身世卻從禁忌轉為可動員的身分符號。

2. 養父母因親緣正當性焦慮而過於努力「做家庭」，養子女也因此而受苦於家族身分危機，這些特殊互動將對被收養者的家庭認同有深遠的負面影響。至於突破親緣侷限的異例，則證實了身世議題的透明化將使得家庭成員有機會能夠發展出更為純粹及樣貌多元的家庭關係，例如親屬稱謂或家庭角色的彈性挪動與轉換。

3. 被收養子女的家庭認同處於有條件的不穩定狀態，而盡可能「讓渡需求」與「表現好」來穩固自己的家庭成員身分。不同於過往西方文獻對「重聚／尋根」的重視，基於台灣社會脈絡的特殊性──養父母與生父母的社會關係、親緣關係較為靠近的被收養子女，卻未處理身世議題，其家庭認同更容易受到生物親屬關係與雙邊家庭互相拉鋸之下的負面影響。

論文外文摘要：

In Taiwan, past research on adoption has mainly been focused on examining the institutional aspect of

adoption or the perspectives of biological and adoptive parents, with little attempt at practical research

on the family identities of adopted children. In recent years, customs regarding adoption in traditional

society has come into conflict with the establishment of institutional adoption, as Taiwanese people tend

to prefer private over agency adoption. As this study explores the disparity between cultural habits and

institutional changes, adoption will be defined and identified by these three different forms: relative

adoption, private adoption (without blood relation), and agency adoption. Primarily utilizing the

“Doing Family” perspective, this study discusses how different forms of adoption influences the family

identities of adoptees. Through in-depth interviews with sixteen adoptees, this study aims to understand

their family identities and investigate adoptive families in practice, from the perspective of adopted

children, a perspective in which current Taiwanese research on adoption is lacking. This study resulted in

the following four findings:

1. Traditional Han Chinese patrilineal values generally exist in contemporary adoptive families. As having

children is essential to filial piety, this deeply affects adoptive parents’ motivation to adopt, with the modern

ideal of a biological nuclear family reinforcing the secrecy surrounding a child’s ancestry, depriving adoptees

of their right to know. However, when issues of passing down the family line or the splitting of inheritance

occur, one’s non-biological identity can then be weaponized against them.

2. As adoptive parents can overdo their efforts of “doing family” out of anxiety for consanguineous

legitimacy, these particular family interactions can negatively impact adopted children’s family identity,

causing them to suffer crises regarding family status. However, exceptional examples that broke through

concerns of kinship only prove that transparency of a child’s background can create opportunities for

diverse family formations. Disclosure of adoption allows for fluidity in familial relations, such as how to

refer to family members or how domestic responsibilities are assigned, and this flexibility may stabilize a

family that may have suffered under rigid definitions.

3. Adopted children may see their status in a family as conditional, and therefore unstable, and tend to

consciously meet these conditions to ensure their place in the family is stable, such as compromising on

personal wants and needs, or maintaining good behavior. In contrast to the importance of reunion and

“root finding” evident in research on Western adoptions, due to Taiwan’s unique cultural circumstances,

families tend to reject addressing the backgrounds of adoptive children, despite adoptive and biological

parents having much closer social or familial relations. The constant tension between adoptive and

biological families can then negatively impact the adoptee’s sense of family identity.

4. When adoptive parents remain open-minded and inform children of their adoption early, frustrations and

discomfort that they may encounter in the development of family identity could be alleviated. By being

able to form a concrete self-identity out of one’s adoptive family, adoptees build within themselves the

resilience to withstand stigma from the outside world.

According to these findings, this study would offer the following directions to guide future policymaking

regarding adoption: adoptive parents should remain open-minded to adoption disclosure; adoption

agencies should increase rigor in the selection process of adoptive parents, as well as provide social

support for adoptees; current legislature should reevaluate the legitimacy of adoption by close relatives.