Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg is under fire after claiming that black babies are adopted “at a discount,” a remark that has sparked fierce backlash from adoption experts and families alike.
Buttigieg’s comments came during a conversation on the Flagrant podcast, where he implied that adopting white children requires getting on a waitlist and making a “deposit on a fetus,” while black children cost less and come with fewer barriers. His claim: there are “literally different lists” based on racial preferences.
The response from the adoption community was swift and unambiguous.
Ryan Hanlon, president of the National Council for Adoption, rebuked Buttigieg’s characterization in an op-ed for The Hill, calling it “ignorant” and “harmful.” Hanlon, who has worked with hundreds of adoption professionals and agencies across the U.S., said Buttigieg’s framing grossly misrepresents the realities of domestic adoption.
“As someone who has worked with hundreds of adoption agencies and professionals across the country for decades, I can confidently say that [Buttigieg’s comments] misrepresent how private adoption works,” Hanlon wrote. “More importantly, when media narratives confuse or conflate key facts, the real harm falls on children and families.”
Buttigieg’s story suggested that racial disparities are built into the system—a notion Hanlon forcefully rejected. He explained that in modern private adoptions, birth mothers—not agencies—typically select adoptive families. And in most cases, race is not the deciding factor.
“Fewer than a third of birth mothers consider race as a major factor when choosing an adoptive family,” Hanlon said. He also added that the concept of agencies offering “discounts” based on the race of a child is not only false but deeply damaging.
“Even more concerning are recent assertions that adoption agencies have begun to lower the cost associated with adopting black children,” Hanlon continued. “This is an unfounded and damaging claim. No credible agency bases its fees on the race of a child. To suggest otherwise is to malign the ethical professionals who work tirelessly to ensure every child is placed in a loving home.”
Adoption advocates worry that Buttigieg’s comments—framed as a politically charged hot take—will discourage potential adoptive families and feed into long-standing myths about how race factors into adoption processes. Hanlon said that while the adoption system isn’t perfect and does need oversight and reform, any criticism should be rooted in fact—not viral soundbites.
Hanlon pointed to recent action by the Federal Trade Commission, which sent warnings to more than two dozen adoption services suspected of misleading advertising. But he made clear that these investigations had nothing to do with race-based pricing or systemic racism in the industry.
Buttigieg, who is known for occasionally stepping outside his policy lane to opine on cultural and political topics, has not responded to the criticism. He has previously sparked controversy for his handling of transportation crises and public remarks about race and religion during his time in the Biden administration.
Social media users and conservatives were quick to seize on the podcast remarks, calling them “race-baiting” and “inflammatory.” Critics accused Buttigieg of distorting a deeply emotional and sensitive issue in order to score political points with a progressive audience.
“This is exactly the kind of culture-war shorthand that does real harm,” Hanlon warned. “Adoption is already a fraught and difficult process. Politicians using it to posture publicly aren’t helping anyone—least of all the children.”
With fewer than 25,000 private domestic infant adoptions each year, Hanlon says that the focus should be on making the process more accessible, not politicizing it. He ended his op-ed with a plea: “Let’s protect and promote adoption—not turn it into a political wedge.”
As the debate continues, Buttigieg’s remarks are now being seen as a flashpoint in a broader conversation about race, family, and the ethical responsibilities of public figures in shaping public perceptions.
