Friday, January 29, 2010



I rejected one of the comments I got because they are a previous stalker, who told me I "stole" my child. Anyway...the comment was TOTALLY RIDICULOUS. She linked to this site that says, "The FBI estimates 500 serial killers currently in the U.S; about 30 or 16% have been identified as adoptees."

It may very well be true that they were adopted, but it is not because they were adopted that they became serial killers. It's because they felt rejected, have some predisposition in their genes or they were abused in some way. To suggest that adoption leads to serial killers is just TOTALLY RIDICULOUS! If anything, this just points to why open-adoption is better. The children have a link to their past and possible have answers to their questions, thus not causing frustration and acting out.

Look at that first quote also means that 470 serial killers in the U.S. were not adopted and I think they are serial killers for the same reasons as the adopted ones: rejected, have some predisposition in their genes or they were abused in some way.

On this same site, they then list all of the adopted serial killers. They even lump MOSES, in with them! How is that for nutty?

Just for laughs I searched for "famous people who have been adopted." I got a huge list of people including: world leaders, actors, performers, poets, writers, educators, singers and athletes. And none of them were serial killers.

I've been told that I am just burying my head in the sand and I am just ignoring how horrible adoption really is, but to say that adoption leads to someone becoming a serial killer is just plain STUPID. I believe in nurture, over nature. I am not naive enough to think it is all "rainbows and sunshine." Nothing ever is (all the time), but if you dwell in the shadows, you will see the negative and I would rather walk in the sunshine.

NOTE TO MY PREVIOUS STALKERS: I will not publish your comments, thanks.


Jill said...

I cannot believe you gave that crazy chick (nice term I am using there!) the time of day by posting her comment. I think we have all established that they are not capable of having a calm, intelligent conversation about this. I am surprised they don't just let it be.......

BethGo said...

The problem is that 16% of the normal population is not adopted therefore the fact that 16% of these criminals are adoptees is significant.
It surprisingly disproportionate to the amount of adoptees in the general population. That is why the statistic is so alarming.

It's funny though because if it turned out that 16% of students matriculating at Harvard were adoptees, adoptive parents would be clinging to those statistics and lauding it as an example of excellence.

Of course, none of this means doesn't mean that YOUR child will be a serial killer however, it is something to think about. The statistics are alarming.

Jill said...

Hmmm, I guess with 2 adopted children I should be REALLY concerned.........

Theresa Milstein said...

If people don't adopt, what's the alternative?

I live in Cambridge, and have had students who have lived under every type of household under the sun: nuclear families, extended families, single parents, grandparents, two mommies, two daddies, foster parents, a parent who is a substance abuser, imprisoned parents, and adoptive parents.

I cannot tell by the work, reading level, the interaction with the student, or the student's relationships with peers where they came from and what's going on at home. Children are human beings - not statistics. We shouldn't stereotype adopted children anymore than we should any other group.

stephanie garcia said...

This is ludicrous and I am sorry you have had to deal with such ignorance!