Growing up In out-of-Home Care: A Comparative Narrative of Identity Formation Among Care Leavers across Family-Based and Group-Based Settings In Taiwan

Background and Purpose: Growing up in out-of-home care represents a distinctive development experience. Although only a small proportion of children in Taiwan were placed in care (approximately 0.13% in 2025), existing literature has extensively documented the challenges faced by this minority group. However, less attention has been paid to how these experiences shape identity formation, particularly from the subjective narratives of care-experienced young people themselves. In Taiwan, the voices of care leavers remain underrepresented in both research and practice. Furthermore, identity formation may vary across care settings. Thus, this study aims to explore identity formation through the narratives of care leavers and to compare differences between family-based and group-based placements.

Methods: Data were drawn from two larger research projects on long-term foster family care and residential care in Taiwan. The analysis focused on “growing up in care,” defined as a minimum of four years in placement, spanning from childhood through the transition to adulthood. The sample included 22 care leavers (7 from foster families and 15 from residential care). Narrative analysis was employed to examine how participants made sense of their experiences and constructed their identities across care contexts.

Findings: The findings reveal a dual dynamic of “shared commonalties” and “contextual divergence” in identity formation. Across both settings, participants internalized the “foster kid” label, often adopting emotional detachment as a coping mechanism, while reframing placement instability and limited autonomy into identities defined by resilience and adaptability. At the same time, identity formation diverged across care settings, reflecting distinct relational and care environments. Care leavers from foster families tended to develop a relational identity, characterized by a stronger sense of family belonging and help-seeking agency. Their identities were shaped through sustained family-like relationships, although some participants still experienced a lingering sense of outsider status. In contrast, those from residential care developed a collective identity, grounded in shared peer experiences. Despite a lack of traditional family structures and limited individualized support, they constructed meaning through shared lived experiences, fostering group identification and a desire to “give back” to the care system. While foster care participants constructed integrative family narratives to balance belonging and detachment, residential care participants manifested compensatory mission-driven narratives that transformed early deprivation into a sense of social purpose.

Conclusion and Implications: Identity formation in out-of-home care is not a passive byproduct of placement, but an active process of re-storying fragmented lived experiences. Rather than producing a fixed survivor identity, these experiences have cultivated internalized adaptability. The divergence between relational and collective identities underscores the imperative for placement-specific support. For practical implications, foster care services should strengthen relational permanency and reduce feelings of outsider status, while residential care should support positive peer-based identities and develop peer mentoring opportunities. More broadly, incorporating the voices of care-experienced young people into service design can enhance identity continuity and empowerment. For policy implications, transitions to adulthood should move beyond material self-sufficiency to include identity-informed support that helps youth integrate their care experiences into a coherent self-narrative.