Kinship that could grow
In a society where relationships carry duties and support, belonging to a family network matters a great deal, and a person without relatives is vulnerable. It follows that Apache nations, like many others, had ways of bringing people into kin networks: by birth, by marriage, and by what outsiders often call adoption. This article describes what is known in general terms and explains why the record on the subject is uneven.
Terms need care. “Adoption” in English suggests a legal process with paperwork. The practices described here were customary arrangements, carried out within families and communities, and they varied among the Western Apache, Chiricahua, Mescalero, Jicarilla, Lipan and Plains Apache. Much of what is written comes from outside observers: anthropologists, soldiers, missionaries and officials, whose access to private family matters was limited and whose purposes differed. Statements below are therefore general and hedged, and they do not describe any family’s current practice.
Relatives who raise children
The most ordinary form of what could be called adoption is the raising of a child by relatives other than the parents. Because children were already surrounded by grandparents, aunts and uncles, an extended household could readily absorb a child whose parents had died, were ill, or were away. Often this was simply continuous with how children were already cared for, and it carried no break in the child’s family ties.
Kin terms support this. In many Southern Athabaskan kinship systems, a single term can cover several relatives that English separates, so that a child may call a mother’s sister by a term close to “mother”. Taking on the care of a niece or nephew did not require a new category of relationship. This overlaps with ordinary Apache kinship importance: the network already existed, and responsibility flowed along it.
Bringing in people from outside
The historical record also describes the incorporation of people who were not born into a family. Two kinds are most often discussed.
Adults and children taken in through relationship. A person who married into a group became a relative, and a person who lived with and was supported by a family could, through years of sharing and obligation, be treated as kin. Friendship, alliances between groups and long association could create relationships that were spoken of in family terms.
Captives. Warfare and raiding between Apache groups, their neighbors, the Spanish, the Mexicans and the Americans involved the taking of captives on all sides, and Apache people were themselves captured and enslaved, a subject treated seriously in the history of the Spanish and Mexican frontier. Accounts from several periods describe children captured by Apache groups being raised within Apache families and treated as relatives, sometimes growing up to marry and take on an Apache identity. Some captives later returned, or were recovered, and left accounts of their experiences. It is important to say plainly that captivity was a harm, whatever care a child might later receive, and that sources written by captives or their families describe a range of experiences. The record is also shaped by who wrote it and why; some accounts may be exaggerated or romanticized, and many others were never written down.
What is not well documented
Several matters cannot be stated with confidence:
- How often any of this happened. There are no reliable counts. Anecdotes from the record should not be taken as proof of how common a practice was.
- Differences between groups. Whether one nation was more likely than another to take in non-relatives, or how customs differed, is unclear from the available sources.
- The meaning to the people involved. Observers rarely recorded how an adopted child or an incorporated outsider was regarded within the family in the long term. Apache accounts of these relationships are the authoritative ones, and not all are shared publicly.
- Ceremonial or formal aspects. If any ceremonies or formal steps accompanied adoption, they belong to the families and communities concerned and are not described here.
Adoption and outside intervention
The twentieth century brought a different kind of adoption experience. Government and church policies led to many Native children being removed from their families, either to boarding schools or into non-Native foster and adoptive homes. The effects on families, on language and on a child’s sense of belonging have been widely discussed. The Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 was enacted in response to concerns about the removal of Native children from their families and communities, and it sets rules for child custody proceedings involving Native children. Details of how it is applied are a legal matter, and readers needing guidance should seek qualified legal advice or contact the relevant tribal government.
For the history of schooling, see the topic of Apache boarding school history, which looks at the broader policy of forced assimilation and the lasting harm it caused.
Belonging today
In the present day, many Apache families continue to practice informal kin care: grandparents raising grandchildren, aunts and uncles stepping in, and the extended family taking responsibility for a child whose parents cannot. Questions of formal tribal enrollment and membership are separate and are decided by each nation under its own rules; Apache tribal enrollment is treated elsewhere. Anyone seeking information on adoption within a particular nation’s community or legal system should contact that nation’s own government or social services office.