*Blissful Ignorance
*Best Hope
*If Not Adoption, Then What? Part 1
I know this person is in severe pain and I feel very sad for her. However, I don't want those who are in the middle of an adoption or those still considering adoption to be scared because of her experience. Of course adoption causes pain for the birth mother, but I think the point is, that we are looking at what is best for the child. Just as she is steadfast in her convictions against adoption, I am steadfast in mine for adoption.
In part two of The Case Against Adoption the author brings up the Bible.
"....Personally, I feel anyone with the ability to read comprehensively can see the blatant fact God does NOT condone adoption practises as they are today... and from what the Bible does say about God, I would even suggest He actually does not approve of adoption at all. Why do I say this?... hmmm, Moses led his own people (i.e. natural family and tribe) with his natural brother Aaron out of Egypt at God's behest... which also meant turning against his adoptive family, also at God's command...... "
* First, I see that anyone can distort the Bible to fit how they feel.
* The Bible is full of references to being adopted, Jesus by Joseph, being the most obvious and God was all for that one! In fact, He set that one up himself!
* No where does it say that Moses "turned against" his adoptive family, in fact the adoptive mother came with him when he left Egypt!
"....the 'Baby Scoop Era' (BSE) is a term used to describe the era of 'mass relinquishment' of newborns in the United States starting in the early 50's and following through to the mid/late 70's......The stories that have come out of this period of time are truly horrific and show a mass violation of human rights in both the mother and child."
* 1950's when pregnant unmarried women were wisked away to have their children (TRUE), but this is not the 1950's.
"The fraudulent practise of 'open' adoption. In this scam, a vulnerable mother is inundated by agencies telling her how wonderful she is for choosing adoption. While she is still pregnant and in the eyes of normal, rational society as an expectant mother, in the adoption world, she is swiftly demoted to birthmother, a title she has to wear for the rest of her pregnancy, drumming it into her head she is not a mother and this baby is not hers. Pre-birth matching is common with agencies giving an expectant mother profiles of hopeful couples and she gets to choose, all the while being promised the world of contact and the fact she won't be really losing her child."
*I'm not sure what agency she got this information from, however, the agency I dealt with at no time told "K" that she was not Samuel's mother. They also were very honest with her that although the contract says "A," once the adoption is final "B" could happen (although we will honor what we agreed to). "K" was not told she had to place Samuel for adoption or even should place him. She was counseled and through many conversations came to realize that as a 17 year old girl, she was not ready mentally, financially or emotionally to be a mother.
The author then lists adoption horror stories...black market babies, scams for money or drugs, swapping a live baby with a dead baby, illegally transporting babies from one country to another, murder, abductions and the list continues. These cases certain did and do happen. I agree there are horrible people in the world, BUT, that does not negate all the good that comes form adoption: cultures mixing and coming together, orphans having food and shelter, babies who otherwise would have been aborted, having a chance to become amazing people and this list goes on and on!
"My question then, is if adoption was so good, so fabulous as the advocates would have us think it is, why then is there so much pain involved? Why so much controversy? Why, if it is so loving, does more anguish, more destruction result from it? Personally, I believe people have so much invested in adoption for their own needs they haven't stopped to look at the real truth, the hard facts about what it actually does. I cannot comprehend the desire to erase a child's history, heritage, cultural identity to fulfil one's own lustful desire. I cannot comprehend how a guillotine effect to separate a mother and child cannot be seen as anything but cruel and unnecessary. It is beyond me to understand how causing MORE suffering, MORE pain, MORE loss is actually beneficial to anyone involved in adoption."
* The lies and pain inflicted upon her have blinded her.
* I do not wish to "erase a child's history, heritage, cultural identity". Samuel will always know his history, heritage and cultural identity. He is Columbian and Puerta Rican and we will learn along with him, what that means.
"For the couple whose dreams have been shattered by the news they cannot ever bear their own children, I cannot see how offering a band-aid and invalidating their LOSS is helpful. Too often I hear and see couples faced with this devastating news only to be told its not the end of the world as they can always adopt. I'm sorry but these two issues need to be completely separated. This news is a LOSS all of its own. Most girls I knew growing up, like myself, had dreams about our future children and to be suddenly told they will never be realised is traumatic. These people need to be given the love, support and recognition they deserve, not to be thrown into the pit of creating pain for another family to ease their own."
* It is devastating not to be able to birth my own child, but through much soul searching, I came to realize that my main goal was to be a mother and I love Samuel no less because he did not come from my own body. Should "K" have aborted, kept him and caused them both to go into poverty, sent Samuel into foster care, what?
"I have often heard if we lived in a perfect world adoption wouldn't need to exist. Separating out the issues of abuse, neglect etc, I really do not see the need for the world to be perfect before we rid it of adoption. If adoption was truly a success where all three main parties reported they were truly happy about their situation then perhaps there would be a need for adoption. But in 9/10 cases I know of, have heard of and researched, it is more likely 1-2 parties are unhappy which to me equates to adoption overall being one giant failure."
I do not believe that "in 9/10 cases... it is more likely 1-2 parties are unhappy." If I did, I would not have adopted. I do not want to cause harm to Samuel. Life is not perfect and for that reason alone, we need adoptions to continue and increase exponentially.
"I want a valid reason as to why you think it is okay to continue a practise that is founded on loss, pain, scams, damage and destruction."
So, that's your task, my wonderful followers. I've put my opinion out there and now it's your turn to give her your "valid reason."
10 comments:
You are right many agencies today do counsel and these women are expectant mothers to all involved at that point. BUT, there are private adoptions where they get no counseling and there are agencies that are not ethical as ours are where this kind of manipulation still does happen today.
One thing I've realized in my bloggy world is that we all get it. Most of us don't want to erase our children's past but that's because we desire to learn. Well, you have a living example at home with you. But what I've learned from real life people that don't blog and get minimal training is that they are looking for the easy out when it comes to these things. They request a child that will look closest to them so they won't have to deal with any of these things. In no way am I trying to argue with you, these are just my comments along the way reading your post. I'm very much enjoying your posts.
Ouch, her line about not being thrown in a pit creating pain. Wow! Our agency, and I've never heard anyone else say this about theirs so I don't know if it's the same elsewhere, they won't let you start the process until a year of grieving any kind of loss and they will not in any way allow you to continue infertility while trying to adopt.
In answer to your question I thought I'd leave it separate.
My opinion; we do not live in a perfect world so adoption is going to continue and there is nothing any of us can do to stop adoptions. Children need families. You can't just stop infant adoptions and there are children who have lost their parents due to death and have no other family members that need to be adopted so adoption will always continue.
What needs to be done, again my opinion, is close the unethical agencies and not allow private adoptions. That's where the problems arise. There needs to be required counseling prematch, prebirth and after birth and placement. And the more open adoptions the better. And I wish there was a way to make those agreements legally binding in some way without forcing it upon all parties in a way that would not allow them any room to grow their relationship on their own.
Does she want a list of names? I can provide them... and I can leave out adoptive parents from the list because I am sure our opinions are completely biased in her eyes.
Anti-adoption really irks me. It really does. It is so IGNORANT to think that because your situation wasn't good that every situation is evil and horrific. Just like me thinking that because adoption has been so positive for me, that it is positive for everyone.
I refuse to read anti-adoption blogs at all anymore, so I will not follow your links. But what makes me the most mad about your summation is where she says adoption is a band-aid for adoptive parents. It boils my blood. If she really thinks that, of course she thinks adoption is horrible. She paints a picture as if you show up at the doctor one day thinking you can concieve, leaving the same day learning you cannot at all EVER, and deciding to adopt instead. From point A to point B was FOUR years for us, much longer for others. No, adoption wasn't my first choice, but it isn't second best, either. It is the path that was laid out for me and being here now, I wouldn't have it any other way.
I can see that you put a lot of thought into this, but I really you should try to understand that you haven't walked in her shoes and she hasn't in yours. I don't suspect either person is going to change the other. As far as you being worried that she might change someone's mind that's for them to decide. I think people need to be more educated and talk to other people more. There is tons of people for pro and anti adoption. One thing people need to remember is that there are not two of the same kind of adoption. Just because I was forced, lied and rob of my daughter don't mean others will. And just because someone is content with life.. don't means other will be. It's the birth parents in the end who have to choose adoption and then the adoptive parents step in. The saddest part is the most innocent in all of this debate don't get any say in it.
"It's the birth parents in the end who have to choose adoption"
But that's exactly what the anti-adoption/pro-reform groups point out: there is NO choice.
I have come to realise that part of the problem with the pro vs anti debate around adoption is that the people who benefit from adoption (and I mean the people who only get a positive outcome, who are not losing something in the process) are the adoptive parents. The other two sides of the triad do lose something and do suffer a psychological trauma as a result. When a mother gives birth to a child and then the child is taken away, no matter what rational decision she has made prior to this, she will feel a devastating sense of loss. When a child is taken away from their mother, that child experiences separation trauma - no matter how much love is lavished on them by the next set of caretakers, their senses tell them that that person is not their mother. I urge you to look at this from the other sides of the triad. And please, before everyone says "I'm adopted/ I know an adoptee and they are perfectly happy", consider the fact that adoptees are not likely to tell people that they are unhappy because we are expected to be grateful for being adopted, and we are especially not going to tell adoptive parents, even our own.
Whenever there is money to be made from exploiting the powerless, there will be corruption. Right now, in North America, there is very little protecting unwed, poor, or young mothers from being exploited by the multi-billion-dollar adoption industry. I do not know one single adoption agency that adheres to any true ethical practice, that does NOT routinely apply procedures to mothers that ensure they will find it difficult to keep their babies, that manipulate and influence their "decisions." I know NO agency that talks to a pregnant mother and asks her "What do you need in order to keep your baby?" and then ensures she has ample access to what she requires, and then tells her "If, six weeks after the birth, you still want to surrender your baby, come back for counselling and we will see what troubles are happening that can be solved. If it cannot be solved for you, if you really do not love or want your baby, then we can talk about adoption."
But, no, pregnant mothers are herded onto the "adoption track" before giving birth, before even recovering from birth. They are hence prevented from making any sort of informed decision. THIS is one form of coercion. Open adoption is another such form, as the sole reason it was invented was to get more specifically White mothers to surrender their babies, once mothers began keeping their babies post-BSE. (No market for AA babies meant no pressure on their mothers!).
Adoptive parents promoting and praising coercive practices is one reason why those of us who were raped by adoption feel that they condone the violence that was done to us. Few adoptive parents speak out against reproductive exploitation, coercion, and unnecessary adoptions, but those who actually do speak out against these get the recognition they deserve.
My simple question is about this statement:
"But in 9/10 cases I know of, have heard of and researched, it is more likely 1-2 parties are unhappy which to me equates to adoption overall being one giant failure."
Uh, where is the unbiased research to back this up? Impartial research is beneficial because it nixes the feelings and biases involved. Lots of people have been crying for these studies for years--a big, honest picture of who's satisfied with adoption and who ain't. I'm not a rainbow farter but my sense is 9/10 against as a universal, even among adoptees and first mothers, is probably not representative. Neither is a view that states that overall, most people are satisfied. People may be satisfied because they have learned to me. Cut off in many instances from vital info about themselves, they may just be settling. It's a complicated picture that shouldn't be somebody's axe to grind.
I think the entire system needs reforming. I think that the unethical agencies should be closed down and that private adoptions should either be stopped, or there needs to be a way to document counseling for the biological parents, and if that isn't done, then the adoption shouldn't take place. I don't think that birthmothers should be allowed to sign consent to give up their child until the child is here and the birth mother hasn't received any mind-altering drugs for a certain period.
I agree that you aren't going to change this woman's perception anymore than she will change yours. I thought everything was on the up and up until I started doing my own research into how people feel about adoption, by reading people's comments, blogs, posts on forums, etc. There is a great need for reform, but not abolishment.
I wasn't ready to parent 20 years ago and foolishly believed that relinquishing my child to stangers wouldn't damage her in anyway. Her Aparents are loving people who opened up our semi-open adoption but ultimately - and this has nothing to do with the APs actions - adoption has resulted in years of loss and grief and depression for me and the loss continues everyday in the strangest of ways ie never sharing xmas with her, her denying the fact that her bsibs are her bsibs...etc the list goes on and on...20 years later and I now know I will never get over that loss...
BTw my issues are not her aparents problems. But if I can help a mother and child stay together ie provide unpaid childcare, buy them nappies, food etc then I will do it. Why aren't we all financially helping women in the third world to keep their children and educate them? I know that's where my focus now lies - keeping moms and their children together. I don't want another woman to unnessarily join the angst of the first mother club.
findingmaddy.blogspot.com
Post a Comment