questions that crossed my mind

[Leonor]

I hope I don't upset anyone with my questions, but it's something that crossed my mind. I think open adoption is a wonderfull thing.

But aren't you afraid when adopting internationally, from developing countries, that the children were kidnapped from their families?

Also, didn't anyone consider the idea of "adopting" a teenage mother or a single mother in a distressful situation and help both the mother and child to grow to independence?

[Leatherette]

I am not upset by your questions, just can't believe you are asking them here. The decision to adopt is not one that people take lightly, and every adoptive parent I have met has done a fair amount of research before chosing a particular program.

Can you ever know everything? No. Do kids still need homes? Yes. At a certain point, you have to take a leap of faith.

Open adoptions are not all sunshine, either. You are ultimately "benefitting" from someone else's tough situation, even though you know they chose an adoption plan. Even if they chose you to parent the child they gave birth to.

I am not sure that teen moms and single moms are "putting themselves up for adoption". It might offend them to think that others think they should be. There are programs to assist teen and single mothers. When people adopt a child, they ultimately want just that, to raise a child, not to start their own social program.

Fussy baby, need to cut it short.

L.

[hhurd]

I am not troubled that you asked your question here. There are so many, many types of adoption situations, there are bound to be some that are shady or exploitive. My experience with international adoption was not positive (it fell through, we lost money, and ended up adopting domestically), but I know many families that had it work out extremely well. And there are thousands (millions?) of children that need loving homes. I do think that the expense of international adoption is often exorbitant, especially when you tranlate that into the currency of the country where the adoption is taking place. Just how much is USD $11,000 worth in Vietnamese money anyway? Enough to maybe make some people do bad things? Perhaps...

[EFmom]

Leonor, do tell, how many teenage mothers or single mothers in distressful situations have you "adopted?" How many foster children have you taken in?

When people adopt a child, they ultimately want just that, to raise a child, not to start their own social program. :clap :clap :clap :clap

Generally speaking, adoptive parents tend to give a lot to support children's causes. We donate as much as we can to orphanage projects in my daughters' provinces. We contribute to pay for surgery for cleft affected children and children with congenital heart problems in my daughters orphanages. We pay for foster care for some special needs kids. We helped buy one orphanage medical equipment. We do these things to help kids who most likely will never be adopted and will grow up in institutions.

But here's a little news. Adoptive parents are no more responsible for supporting single mothers or any other acts of charity than are non-adoptive parents. So, if you want to support single mothers and their children, be my guest. It's not my particular "cause."

There are hundreds of thousands of children sitting in orphanages around the world right now waiting for adoption. Generally speaking, if they age out of the system, their prospects are extraordinarily dim. How concerned are you that they will never find families? I do lose a lot of sleep over this.

The way IA works in my daughters' country makes it a senseless scenario to imagine they were kidnapped, so no, I'm not worried about it in the least.

[OnTheFence]

I wanted to add that I think I read in Adoptive Families magazine that only 1% of mothers who placed children for adoptoin were under 18. Our sons birthmother was 30. She was older than me! And already had a child.
I belong to several adoption groups (one I have been with five years) and only one of the birthmothers was a teenager and she already had a child. Most of the other birthmothers were in their 20s and had compelling reasons not to parent.

Kim

[Leonor]

Originally posted by EFmom
Leonor, do tell, how many teenage mothers or single mothers in distressful situations have you "adopted?" How many foster children have you taken in?

I don't understand why are you asking this. If I was a rich married American I certainly would help other single mothers that want to raise their children and want to be commited to motherhood, like I am. I can't. I was suggesting it to those that can.

When I was in distress I was happy to actually had an offer from a very lovely American family to go live with them. But the American law doesn't allow living with another family as a reason to migrate.


But here's a little news. Adoptive parents are no more responsible for supporting single mothers or any other acts of charity than are non-adoptive parents. So, if you want to support single mothers and their children, be my guest. It's not my particular "cause."

I understand your moral views on the matter. I was questioning the reason people adopt children and help children when adults get so little help of this kind.


The way IA works in my daughters' country makes it a senseless scenario to imagine they were kidnapped, so no, I'm not worried about it in the least. [/B]

I said this because am chocked at the huge amount of money agencies make and the huge amount of money people pay to adopt a child. I don't think it's right. And there are cases of children that are kidnapped from their parents, as there was a case of traffic of eyes - a story of children who were kidnapped, had their eyes removed, so rich American children could have eyesight back. :(

[EFmom]

If I was a rich married American I certainly would help other single mothers that want to raise their children and want to be commited to motherhood, like I am. I can't.

People who adopt are not necessarily rich. For most of us, adoption is a huge financial stretch. I know quite literally hundreds of adoptive parents and only know one person who could readily afford to adopt without sacrifice. We don't have enormous bank balances. We do it because we want to be parents. We are "committed to motherhood." Not all of us are married. I know many single adoptive parents.

I was questioning the reason people adopt children and help children when adults get so little help of this kind.

I couldn't disagree more. There are, quite literally a dozen "crisis pregnancy" centers in my smallish city. Now, admittedly, their agenda has a whole lot more to do with making sure that women don't obtain abortions than it does with ongoing support after the baby is no longer a baby. But, they are there.

OTOH, hundreds of thousands of children in orphanages around the world do not have dozens of hometown agencies looking out for them. In most countries, when the children reach a certain age, often in their mid teens, they are discharged from the orphanages with little but the clothes on their backs. With no education, no family and few social skills, and the stigma of having been raised in an orphanage, you can imagine what their lives are like. The quality of life while in the orphanages varies, but it is not like having a family even in the best of them.

As for the money involved in IA, it is a lot. But please do a little research about where it goes. My adoptions each cost a little under $15K. That money went to social workers in the US who must prepare a homestudy, to document processing fees and to the INS. Some went to the central agency in the foreign country that processes adoptions. Our agency fee was not particularly big. We paid a chunk to the orphanage, which goes to better the lives of children remaining behind. The single biggest expense was transportation and travel for two adults to stay in country for two weeks.

Documented cases of kidnapping children are very few and far between. Unfortunately, it does occasionally happen in some areas. Adoptive parents do need to be careful. But as another poster pointed out, most do tons of research and are very well aware of the issues going into it.

As for your horror story about the child who had their eyes removed, I would be very interested in hearing the source of this information, because it smacks of urban legend to me.

If you are interested in what really goes on in IA, I recommend, The Children Can't Wait, by Laura Cecere.

[Leonor]

Originally posted by EFmom
I couldn't disagree more. There are, quite literally a dozen "crisis pregnancy" centers in my smallish city. Now, admittedly, their agenda has a whole lot more to do with making sure that women don't obtain abortions than it does with ongoing support after the baby is no longer a baby. But, they are there.

Yes, but those don't really help. That was my point.

As for your horror story about the child who had their eyes removed, I would be very interested in hearing the source of this information, because it smacks of urban legend to me.


It wasn't an online rumour, it was a news item on TV a long time ago.

Thanks for all your information.

[EFmom]

For the adoption of children for body parts myth, see http://www.iavaan.org/News/Body_Parts_Business.htm

[Amazlilith]

Here is the issue I find in this whole post...Just because I can not or chose not to bear a child, why do I then need to become responsible for someone that goes and gets pregnant? I want to be a mother to a baby, raise that baby as if I gave birth to it. You can not place social responcibility on us just because we adopt this is a question for everyone in society.

[Laurel]

I adopted because I wanted to be a parent. As honorable and fulfilling as it would be to help out a teenage mother, that would not make me a parent. Perhaps this sounds selfish, but to that I would say that no parent, bio or adoptive, has children for purely unselfish reasons. It's just that when you're a bio parent, people rarely question or examine those reasons. When you're an adoptive parent, sudden you're under the microscope.

My ds's birthmother would have had a great deal of support if she had chosen to parent him. But she didn't. There were things she wanted him to have that she couldn't give him, no matter how much support she had. Her decision to place him for adoption was made independently of dh and me. If we had not adopted him, she would have placed him with someone else. I know that there are cases of birthmothers being pressured into adoption, but I also know that this was definitely not the case for my son's birthmom. If anything, she was pressured greatly NOT to place him.

It seems like you're assuming (correct me if I've misinterpreted) that the decision to place a child for adoption is the wrong decision and would only have been made if the woman lacked education and support or was pressured into making it. This just isn't so. Again, I know there are situations where woman are pressured into choosing adoption, and I think this is WRONG, but I do think adoption is a completely legitimate choice that should be made available to women along with other choices. I've seen birthmothers vilified for their decision, told that they are "bad" mothers, etc. I also think that there are people who should have and probably would have placed their children for adoption if that choice had been made available to them in an unbiased, informed manner. I guess I've just seen both sides. I've seen women receive incredible pressure to parent children that they know they aren't ready to parent, and I think this is just as wrong as pressuring someone to place a child for adoption.

I can't really comment on IA since our adoption was domestic. I don't think I'd worry too much about kidnapping though. If it was a concern, there are proper channels to fight things like this, but it doesn't mean you shouldn't adopt a child at all. If I was in an adoption situation and had bad vibes or uneasy feelings about such possibilities in relation to an agency or particular child, I would surely hope that I would have the integrity to back out.

[OnTheFence]

Originally posted by Leonor
I
I said this because am chocked at the huge amount of money agencies make and the huge amount of money people pay to adopt a child. I don't think it's right. And there are cases of children that are kidnapped from their parents, as there was a case of traffic of eyes - a story of children who were kidnapped, had their eyes removed, so rich American children could have eyesight back. :(


This burns me up. Most agencies are NOT FOR PROFIT. Our social worker who owns an agency works like a dog for pennies and often times neglecting her own children because babies get born or problems come up during school events, vacations, etc. Also people pay FEES to adopt. Its not cheap for homestudies, legal, paper work, counseling, plus these agenceis have overhead like building fees and utilities, plus pay their staff.

Who are you to judge what is the right price of fees? or peoples intentions when adopting.

[hhurd]

I cannot speak for the OP, but I can speak to exorbitant adoption fees, which I have experienced first hand. For such a regulated transaction, the infinite variety of fees and expenses seemed mighty irregular to my husband and I. We had no objection to paying the agency, social workers, lawyers, etc...for their hard work but every time we turned around there was some new expense that came out of nowhere. When you are in the middle of the adoption process and eager to move forward you pay up rather than argue. Our adoption cost us thousands more than we were told to expect. Much more than the highest estimate, and it actually went really smoothly. We joked that we wished there was an adoption better business bureau for us to turn to. And, everyone's expenses are soooo different, it just seems so random, kwim?

The OP's opinions about the expense of adoption are not that unusual. I encounter such questions all the time, and I think there's a grain of truth in them. Why the indignent reactions to her questions? There's plenty of room for improvement in the world of adoption, IMO.

[EFmom]

I guess I find annoying the assumption that because one is interested in adoption, one is somehow much more responsible for single mothers, or whatever social ill is being discussed than anyone else. Normally these aspersions are being cast by people who themselves do nothing to fix the problem they complain about, but for some reason we are presumed to have this responsibility.

Frankly I get sick of it. If it's not this particular question, it's "why didn't you adopt from the foster care system," from people who never in a million years would think about adopting from the foster care system, and who are usually clueless about what that entails.

There is nothing stopping the OP from paying out to raise other people's children, nor is there anything stopping the foster care promoters from adopting from that system. People seldom walk up to bio parents and ask them why they chose to give birth to children when their money would be better spend supporting single mothers.

hhurd, I am sorry that you had a bad experience with international adoption. I had zero surprises with the fees for my two adoptions. The only item that was mildly unanticipated was an airline charge for overweight luggage that amounted to $40. In fact, the first adoption cost considerably less than what we were quoted because the agency found they didn't need to charge as much for their end of the program, and thus they reduced their fees. We had signed on at the higher fee, and they were under absolutely no obligation to give us a break, but they did.

We did a lot of research to find a good program and a reputable agency that DOES have the interests of orphaned and abandoned children at heart and it payed off for us.

[hhurd]

I absolutely agree with the first part of your post, EFmom. It annoyes me too that so many people expect adoptive parents to be so much more "socially responsible" than parents who give birth.

Regarding the expense issue...To clarify, I was not speaking about our IA experience in my last post, I was refrencing our successful DA. Which occured after losing thousands of dollars and spending 18 months trying to adopt from Vietnam. In both cases we spent a long time researching agencies and checking refrences and chose the agency that had the best reputation, as far as we could tell. Several members of our community had successful experiences with them, like it sounds like you did with yours, which makes my point, I think. To clarify further, I don't think it was necessarily the agency's fault that things were so much more expensive than we expected. Just the nature of the flawed beast.

[Leatherette]

The OP's opinions about the expense of adoption are not that unusual. I encounter such questions all the time, and I think there's a grain of truth in them. Why the indignent reactions to her questions? There's plenty of room for improvement in the world of adoption, IMO.


If the questions were directed at the world of adoption rather than at adoptive parents, they would be appropriate. If she had asked, "Do you all know if there are safeguards in place to ensure that agencies do not place kidnapped children?" or "Wouldn't it be great if there were more programs to support single/young moms who wanted to try to parent their children?", I would not be indignant, I'd be nodding my head in agreement.

The follow-up posts referring to all of the "rich Americans" adopting, even for body parts for their bio children further taints the intent of the original post.

I have had my daughter with me for less than two months, and already a few acquaintances have asked me if I love her as much as my bio-child ("is it the same?"). It doesn't get less offensive as more people ask it.

When you adopt a child, you expect lots of questions and comments that don't sit right with you. I generally answer any questions honestly and in a way that paints my daughter, adoption, and birthparents in a positive light. I think everyone here has been civil and positive, if not a wee bit indignant.

L.

[Leonor]

Originally posted by EFmom
For the adoption of children for body parts myth, see http://www.iavaan.org/News/Body_Parts_Business.htm

The world is full of evil people, people believe in what they want. What I saw was a news item and I remember children that didn't have eyes.

[AdinaL]

Perhaps, asking the question of the adoption "industry" in general rather than pointing the question at the parent would have been better phrasing.

There are evil people everywhere. But they aren't hiding under every bed, waiting for unsuspecting people to jump on.

The media has a spin all its own sometimes - no clue what they want sometimes, or what they choose to prove.

In addition, please remember to be sensitive to the mamas here. No decision regarding parenting is made lightly. By any of us here. Making any of them sound like they have been done for the wrong reasons or done incorrectly will raise the hackles of any mama here.

Much :love and :hippie to all of you.

[BunnysMomma]

Originally posted by hhurd

The OP's opinions about the expense of adoption are not that unusual. I encounter such questions all the time, and I think there's a grain of truth in them. Why the indignent reactions to her questions? There's plenty of room for improvement in the world of adoption, IMO.

Because the general perception is that adoptive parents buy their children but bio parents don't. Health insurance pays for the cost of having a child, but parents pay for the cost of adopting a child. People don't equate paying a doctor, a hospital, etc. with paying an agency, and attorney, etc. So adoptive parents are looked at suspiciously.

And often times the people who ask these questions are very accusatory and want to argue when you answer their questions.

It all has to do with society not yet accepting the legitimacy of adoptive families.

And btw, there's a lot of room for improvement in the birth industry in this country, as well, but when people talk about that, parents are the victims of the problem. They are not secret colluders!

Wilma:)

[hhurd]

BunnysMomma wrote:

"And btw, there's a lot of room for improvement in the birth industry in this country, as well, but when people talk about that, parents are the victims of the problem. "


I think there are many adoptive parents, and children waiting to be adopted, that ARE the victims of the "adoption industry" in this, and other, countries. Do I mean every adoptive parent and adopted child? Of course not. Recognizing that there is room for improvement does not taint individual adoption experiences, just like recognizing there is room for improvement in the birth industry does not taint individual birth experiences.

I distinguish my child from the process that brought him to me (i.e., adoption), so it's possible for me to be critical of the process. Criticizing the adoption industry (and yes, I think it's an industry) does NOT equal criticizing my family.

[BunnysMomma]

What I was trying to say, hhurd, is that when people criticize the birth industry, they criticize the industry. When people criticize the adoption industry, they often criticize adoptive parents, too. I'm not saying we shouldn't criticize the adoption industry. But we shouldn't vilify adoptive parents in the process!

Wilma:)

[hhurd]

I understood what you were trying to say, I was just expanding upon it. ITA that adoptive parents should not be vilified just because they adopted their children.

I do have to add that criticizing parents who gave birth to their children (as opposed to adoptive parents) is one of the most popular thread topics on this board. There are many threads complaining about family members, perfect strangers, whomever...who did something that the poster didn't agree with. So, one or two posts that question some aspect of adoption I can live with, and even welcome the open debate.

[Leonor]

Ît wasn't my intention to vilify anyone. Sorry if I offended.

[kate-astrophe]

I absolutely agree with the first part of your post, EFmom. It annoyes me too that so many people expect adoptive parents to be so much more "socially responsible" than parents who give birth.


I would say that no parent, bio or adoptive, has children for purely unselfish reasons. It's just that when you're a bio parent, people rarely question or examine those reasons. When you're an adoptive parent, sudden you're under the microscope.

I just want to offer a different perspective on this expectation. Adoptive parents are benefitting from another person's pain, and in a more general sense, from the social ills that plague the world. IMO it only follows that they should make some attempt to ease some of this pain. Being entrusted with a child who was born to someone else carries a lot more responsibility and scrutiny than giving birth. Parenting a child that you give birth to is your right; parenting a child that someone else gave birth to and entrusted you with is a privelege, and with priveleges come responsibilities.

"I couldn't disagree more. There are, quite literally a dozen "crisis pregnancy" centers in my smallish city. Now, admittedly, their agenda has a whole lot more to do with making sure that women don't obtain abortions than it does with ongoing support after the baby is no longer a baby. But, they are there."

You hit the nail on the head when you said there is no ongoing support. The only thing I'd add is that there's no ongoing support after the baby is no longer a pregnancy. There are exceptions to this, but they are few and far between.

It seems like you're assuming (correct me if I've misinterpreted) that the decision to place a child for adoption is the wrong decision and would only have been made if the woman lacked education and support or was pressured into making it.

There is a lack of information. After being involved in post-placement birthparent support for a few years, I realized that while there is plenty of information available about how to make an adoption plan, there is very little information about what happens after the papers are signed and everyone goes home. Adoption counselors and by and large very well meaning people who try to provide birthmothers with all the information at their disposal. There are many birthparents who feel, at the time of the placement, that they did all the research they could and made an educated a decision as possible. They believe that they are doing the best thing, that the sacrifice will be worth it in their own lives because they get to finish their education, travel, grow up a little more, ect. and no one tells them any differently. And then 18 months or 2 years later they find themselves in an emotional freefall far beyond what they were told to expect. Suddenly the things they sacrificed their babies for seem worthless in the face of the pain they experience. The feeling of being tragically mislead is very common among birthmothers, even those who tried everything to prevent being mislead. My point is that an informed, educated decision is almost impossible to make in this situation.

Her decision to place him for adoption was made independently of dh and me. If we had not adopted him, she would have placed him with someone else.

You are underestimating the effect of looking through books and books of prospective adoptive parents with all the money, education and stability that she feels she doesn't have. It's a touchy thing, pre-palcement matching. On the one hand, it does foster a bond in open adoption, but on the other hand, it absolutly creates a sense of resposibility on the part of the expectant parent. How could she not feel guilty and obligated and ashamed of her circumstances when faced with the wishes and yearnings of so many prospective adoptive parents who have so many of the cultural rubber-stamps that she lacks? Nobody means this to be harmful or coercive, but it is. Even if she never sees those "dear birthimother" letters, when people gets wind of an unplanned pregnancy being carried to term with an uncertain future, people come out of the woodwork with their friends of friends who can't conceive or even offers of money for the baby. She gets a sense of the desperation many people feel about becoming parents. She begins to feel, when she looks at her own life, that she would be doing her child *harm* if she were to keep him, with all the would-be good parents out there.

I know I've taken this discussion somewhat off course. Sorry about that. Thanks for reading this far.

-Kate

edited for NAK spelling

[Leatherette]

I don't think that any big decision we make in life is free of joys and regrets. I don't know what else to say, really. I am sorry there is bad in the world, and I do my best not to be a part of it.

L.

[EFmom]

Adoptive parents are benefitting from another person's pain, and in a more general sense, from the social ills that plague the world.

All of us who live in the developed world benefit from the social ills that plague the world.

[hhurd]

Finally! Real debate in the Adoption Forum! Here's my repsonse to kate-astrophe, who said:


"Being entrusted with a child who was born to someone else carries a lot more responsibility and scrutiny than giving birth."


Maybe if more people were more responsible about deciding to get pregnant, and scrutinized the long term impact of their decision to do so, the world would be a better place. Why place the brunt of the responsibilty and scutiny on adoptive parents?


and "Parenting a child that you give birth to is your right"

Yeah, and sometime the ability to give birth is just a matter of biology, physiology, and luck. Infertile couples, therefore, have fewer rights than fertile ones?

and "And then 18 months or 2 years later they find themselves in an emotional freefall far beyond what they were told to expect. Suddenly the things they sacrificed their babies for seem worthless in the face of the pain they experience."


Children cannot wait around 18 -24 months for their birthparents to figure out what they really want. And, are the babies that are placed for adoption really "sacrificed?"

[OnTheFence]

Originally posted by Leonor
The world is full of evil people, people believe in what they want. What I saw was a news item and I remember children that didn't have eyes.

Proof please. Surely you can find one thing on line to back this up.

Also we adopted and are far from rich. Of most the people I know that do adopt, I wouldnt classify them as "rich" either. Middle Class, even lower middle class americans adopting.

Kim

[kate-astrophe]

Originally posted by hhurd
Maybe if more people were more responsible about deciding to get pregnant, and scrutinized the long term impact of their decision to do so, the world would be a better place. Why place the brunt of the responsibilty and scutiny on adoptive parents?

I agree wholeheartedly with this. It's *everyone's* responsibility to make the world a better place. But this is a discussion about adoption and adoptive parents.

I want to remind you that birth control is not fail safe. while many people get pregnancy without thinking about it, many people get pregnant while tring not to.

Yeah, and sometime the ability to give birth is just a matter of biology, physiology, and luck. Infertile couples, therefore, have fewer rights than fertile ones?

It's not a question of fewer rights, but of different repsonsibilites. Everyone's choices and circumstances carry different rights and responsibilites. You can't quanitfy them and compare them. I'm just pointing out some responsibilites specific to adoptive parents.

Children cannot wait around 18 -24 months for their birthparents to figure out what they really want. And, are the babies that are placed for adoption really "sacrificed?"

Yikes! I never said children should have to wait! It is NOT in the best interest of the child to be parented for so long by one parent, and then be tossed back to the birthparents because they changed their minds. I was speaking more about the arc of a birthparent's grief, how it doesn't settle on them for many months, and the regret and betrayal they feel is unexpected and engulfing.

About sacrifice: Yes, it is a sacrifice for a parent to give her child to someone else to raise. The child is not the sacrifice, the birthparent's feelings are the scarifice. Sorry if I was unclear. (I think I've muddied the waters even further)

And EFmom:
All of us who live in the developed world benefit from the social ills that plague the world.

I don't understand. Does that exempt you?

[BunnysMomma]

Kate, I appreciate your thoughtfulness in contributing to this conversation, but I do want to respond to some of the things you said.

Originally posted by kate-astrophe

Adoptive parents are benefitting from another person's pain, and in a more general sense, from the social ills that plague the world. IMO it only follows that they should make some attempt to ease some of this pain.

Adoptive parents are no more responsible for the birth parents' pain or the general social ills that plague the world than is anybody else, so no, we don't have more of a responsibility to help resolve the problem than the average person does. In fact, I would argue that adoptive parents do more than a lot of people do to ease social ills by providing homes for children who need them. No, adoption is not motivated solely by altrusim, but if I had a nickel for every time someone has said to me "I could never do what you've done" (or something similar), I wouldn't have to be taking out a loan to finance my second adoption!!


Being entrusted with a child who was born to someone else carries a lot more responsibility and scrutiny than giving birth. Parenting a child that you give birth to is your right; parenting a child that someone else gave birth to and entrusted you with is a privelege, and with priveleges come responsibilities.

It's comments like this that undermine the legitimacy of adoptive families. An adoptive family is legally exactly the same as a biological family. Parenting a child, no matter how that child entered the family, is always a right, a privilege, and a responsibility. Adoptive parents may face some different issues than bio parents do, but once again, just because our children entered our familes via adoption doesn't make us somehow beholden to someone else or more responsible for the rest of the world. To think that we somehow owe the world something for our adoption makes it sound like we have to atone for adopting, and it's just another way to divide families and discriminate against adoptive families.

My point is that an informed, educated decision is almost impossible to make in this situation.

That may be so, but what is the alternative? Should birthparents not be allowed to make a plan for adoption because they can't anticipate beforehand how they will feel about it in the future? That is a risk we all take when we make important, life-changing decisions.

I am adopted and an adoptive mother (in the process of my second adoption). I am also a former adoption social worker. I have worked with birth parents, adoptive parents, and adopted children. I feel that I have the utmost compassion for birthparents. I know that they are not in an easy situation. I know that they are faced with enormous pressures. When I worked with birthparents, I did my best to help them explore all their options, including means of social, emotional, and financial support should they choose to keep their children. My program had no financial incentive to promote adoption over retention. I know firsthand the pain that adopted children can experience, so I know that adoption is not a perfect fix. I don't view adoption as a means for finding children for families. I view it as a way to find families for children. Therefore, my first priority was always to keep the child with the birthparent if that was possible. But when a birthparent has decided to surrender his or her child, it is disrespectful to all involved to treat adoptive families as different or less deserving of being parents or more responsible to the world at large. Ultimately, attitudes like that make it harder for adopted children.

I feel great compassion for the birthmother of my child. But I don't feel responsible for her situation or that of any other birthparent. My greatest contribution to easing the world's social ills is raising kind, compassionate, responsible people. I think that's incumbent on all parents, adoptive or bio. Anything I choose to do above and beyond that is a bonus, not a requirement.

Wilma:)

*edited for spelling*

[Laurel]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by kate-astrophe
"Adoptive parents are benefitting from another person's pain,. IMO it only follows that they should make some attempt to ease some of this pain. "

I"m in agreement with this and I feel like my dh and I have done our very best to do so (as much as we can, which is admittedly limited since we are not there with her in her "inner mind"). We have done whatever she wanted and communicated that she needed, including respecting her desire to end contact which was the last thing I ever wanted to do.

"Being entrusted with a child who was born to someone else carries a lot more responsibility and scrutiny than giving birth."

But should it? I'm not saying that adoptive parents should lessen or shirk their responsibilities, but only that all parents should step up to the plate. I agree with the poster who says this is about the child, whether the choice is placing or parenting, and whether adoption is even considered at all.

"parenting a child that someone else gave birth to and entrusted you with is a privelege, and with priveleges come responsibilities."

I don't think anybody is denying this. I"m acutely aware of the gift I"ve been given and the sacrifice that went into it. So are most of the adoptive parents that I know. The responsibilities weigh heavily on my mind. I put my all into parenting, and I have put my all into my relationship with my son's birthmother.

I definitely never meant to imply that it's OK for adoptive parents to take someone's baby and go lah-di-dah-ing through life now that they have what they've always wanted. At ds's placement, which lasted five hours (in part because of the difficulty his birthmom was having), I was able to see some of that pain and sacrifice, and I am forever grateful for that experience because it impressed upon me the magnitide of what I was receiving and the cost at which it came.

I still feel sometimes that adoptive parents are not allowed to be normal and "real". I don't think that our feelings and even our pain have to negate or be negated by those of the other members of the adoption triad--I think there can be room for all our experiences and feelings as long as all of us are open, humble, and teachable.

" And then 18 months or 2 years later they find themselves in an emotional freefall far beyond what they were told to expect. Suddenly the things they sacrificed their babies for seem worthless in the face of the pain they experience."

I can only speak about our individual adoption and my child's birthmother, and I can only go on what she has communicated with us, which I am sure is censored to some extent by her, and by what her caseworker shares with us, but how am I supposed to make conjectures about what she may be feeling? (though I do it anyway...) She says she has no regrets. I don't think that diminishes the pain, but she feels she made the right decision to this day. Nobody ever said that feeling pain means the decision was wrong. She has had good things happen in her life that she has told us are a direct result of her choice to place. She made the decision to place for adoption pretty much as soon as she found out she was pg, long before she told anyone, and months before she went to an agency. She chose a family privately at one point and backed out on them because she felt they weren't right.

My neighbor is also a birthmother and has shared her feelings freely with me. She is six years out from her decision and has ridden the grief, and still feels her decision was the right one.

I totally agree that post-placement support needs to be better. I think birthmoms deserve every ounce of help that is possible to have given. When I was talking about making an informed, educated decision, I mostly meant that in an ideal world, other people would stay out of the way and let these women make a decision free of judgment and pressure. There are people who never consider adoption even though it might be a viable choice for them simply because of all the media myths and societal "shame" surrounding that choice. I agree that it's a decision you can't really prepare yourself for completely, because nobody can know that kind of pain until they're experiencing it. But I don't think that the pain itself makes adoption the wrong choice.

I guess it comes down to personal responsibility on the part of all involved. As adoptive parents, my dh and I have tried our darndest to accept and live up to that responsibility, and to do the right thing in regards to our relationship with our son's birthmother. It hasn't seemed like a sacrifice for us, because we love her and *want* to do everything we can for her.

[Amazlilith]

Originally posted by kate-astrophe
I just want to offer a different perspective on this expectation. Adoptive parents are benefitting from another person's pain, and in a more general sense, from the social ills that plague the world. IMO it only follows that they should make some attempt to ease some of this pain. Being entrusted with a child who was born to someone else carries a lot more responsibility and scrutiny than giving birth. Parenting a child that you give birth to is your right; parenting a child that someone else gave birth to and entrusted you with is a privelege, and with priveleges come responsibilities.


In reading the above I find myself highly offended. My daughter was placed with me through fost/adopt. Her bio did NOTHING to ensure that she kept this baby girl. I DO NOT believe that giving birth is just a right. It is a privledge and it too has responsibilities. I think that before you give birth that you should have to go through everything that we as adoptive parent have to go through. Maybe then we wouldn't have all the "Social ills" you are speaking about.

[Leatherette]

I appreciate all of the adoptive parents' input here. I don't think I could defend legal, legitimate adoption (??????) as patiently as you all are.

When birthing a baby is called a right, and parenting a child you did not give (or perhaps couldn't give) birth to is a priviledge, logic is out the window, and I have difficulty participating while keeping my anger in check. I did not think people believed this way, except in the case of questionable adoptions.

I am glad to have the right and priviledge to parent my biological son and my adoptive daughter. I take the responsibility very seriously.

Ugh. I have worked with so many abused and neglected kids whose parents had the right to keep having them and keeping them and beating them, with counselors and school personnel and social workers working to help the parents preserve their rights, so the "right to give birth and parent the ones you give birth to" comment is just killing me, even if that was not the intended meaning behind it.

L.

[Laurel]

I don't like the term "right" either. I prefer to think in terms of obligations and stewardships. I have been struck by the complexities of the different types of adoptions and how that impacts our decisions and feelings. I don't go around every day thinking what a privilege (vs. a "right") it is to have my son. He is just my son. I am responsible for him. I love him, care for him, nurture him, and teach him.

But when my thoughts turn to his birthmom and the events surrounding his placement, I do have those feelings that this is a great gift that I've been given, and that I need to be aware of that fact. I think that if my son had been born to an abusive mother and had come to me through foster care, my feelings would be much different. But she didn't have to place him. She took a great leap of faith giving him to virtual strangers and trusting that we would be good parents to him.

At the same time, he is now my son. Ultimately, I feel *most* accountable for my parenting to my son and to God, not to his birthmother.

[kate-astrophe]

"I think that before you give birth that you should have to go through everything that we as adoptive parent have to go through. Maybe then we wouldn't have all the "Social ills" you are speaking about."

You misunderstood me. I said that parenting a child *you have given birth to* is a right. I didn't say that giving birth is a right. A person is free to squander that right, as your child's birthmother did.

I'll repeat that again, since I jstu read the what was post while I was writing mine. I said that parenting a child *you have given birth to* is a right. I didn't say that giving birth is a right.

"I think that before you give birth that you should have to go through everything that we as adoptive parent have to go through. Maybe then we wouldn't have all the "Social ills" you are speaking about."

I'm sorry, that's just not realistic. I stand by my statement that in order to be entrusted with a child you did not give birth to, you must stand up to more scrutiny than a person who simply becomes pregnant. I'm *not* saying it's fair.

"But I don't think that the pain itself makes adoption the wrong choice."

I don't know why, but many bmoms, preplacement, believe that doing the "right" thing will make the process less painful, when this simply isn't the case. They also believe that seeing the happienss they've brought to someone else's life will lessen the pain, and that's not true either. What happens is that the anethetising effects of these ideas wears off after awhile and reality hits them very hard. After riding through this phase and getting good and angry, most brithmothers would come to accept their decision as the "right" thing to do. There is residual anger, however, over believing these false ideas.

"I guess it comes down to personal responsibility on the part of all involved. As adoptive parents, my dh and I have tried our darndest to accept and live up to that responsibility, and to do the right thing in regards to our relationship with our son's birthmother. It hasn't seemed like a sacrifice for us, because we love her and *want* to do everything we can for her."

:thumb

"I still feel sometimes that adoptive parents are not allowed to be normal and "real". I don't think that our feelings and even our pain have to negate or be negated by those of the other members of the adoption triad--I think there can be room for all our experiences and feelings as long as all of us are open, humble, and teachable."

I agree with this. The pressure of being the "ideal" parent and bearing up under scrutiny is very difficult and limiting. I applaud your attitude.

"Adoptive parents are no more responsible for the birth parents' pain or the general social ills that plague the world than is anybody else, so no, we don't have more of a responsibility to help resolve the problem than the average person does."

But you would not have become parents (in most cases) if these ills did not exist. I don't think it's unreasonable to give back in some meaningful way.

"It's comments like this that undermine the legitimacy of adoptive families. An adoptive family is legally exactly the same as a biological family. "

I don't understand how a directed sense of social resonsibility undermines the legitimacy of your family :confused: I see adoptive families everywhere lately. Two major shows have adoption storylines right now. Their picture isn't always flattering, but no one's saying that their not really a family because they are adopting.

There was a lot more that I wanted to respond to here, but the munchkin is up from her nap. I'll try to post more later.

-Kate

[Laurel]

Originally posted by kate-astrophe
[
I don't know why, but many bmoms, preplacement, believe that doing the "right" thing will make the process less painful, when this simply isn't the case. They also believe that seeing the happienss they've brought to someone else's life will lessen the pain, and that's not true either. There is residual anger, however, over believing these false ideas.

So what can we do to change this? Is it even possible? I'm asking a genuine question here, because I agree that this is an important issue. I do think this kind of pain is something you really can't fathom until you experience it (much like infertility, I imagine). I know that even I, having witnessed some of those moments at placement, can't really comprehend the depth of what she experienced.

A few weeks ago, a friend of my mom's who has a daughter that is considering adoption asked me if I would write to the daughter and share some of my feelings about adoption. Grandma really feels her daughter should place the baby. I did write a letter, but found the whole idea somewhat awkward. I tried to not place judgments on anything, but to just share our experience as objectively as possible. I suspect that Grandma wanted to to try to encourage her daughter to place, but I just wasn't going to do that. As I tried to use my intuition to write this, I felt like I should share some of my perceptions of ds's birthmom's experience, even the difficult parts. Afterwards I found myself wondering if that was the right thing to do, or if I would "scare" her away. But I decided that she would need to make a choice based on reality, and that was part of the reality of our story.

[EFmom]

I don't understand. Does that exempt you?

Kate, no, if it exempted me, I would hardly have used the words "All of us." My point is again that you are trying to lay some special burden on adoptive parents for benefitting from the world's social ills. Every single person in the developed world, you and I included, benefits from lower labor costs in third world countries, for example. We don't even have to like it, but we can't escape it.

This is one guilt balloon that isn't landing on my shoulders, particularly as it relates to the OP. ITA with Wilma's post, which expressed it beautifully.

We did not cause these children to be conceived. We did not cause whatever underlying social problems caused them to be placed for adoption, and in fact, the underlying problems themselves vary with the type of adoptions we have, and perhaps even with each particular adoption.

If a woman decides to place her child for adoption, that is her decision. I think that decision needs to be respected. No one here is suggesting that it isn't painful, or that it is ideal. In an ideal world, no woman would get pregnant with a child she didn't want and couldn't raise. But the woman is making the best decision she feels that she can make at the time. I think faulting the adoptive parents for her decision is disrespectful.

Through my adoption experience, I have become much more aware of how many children worldwide are living in orphanages, without families. I do what I can to make the lives of children who will likely never get adopted better. But I don't think I have any special responsibility (nor do I remotely have the ability) to fix the extremely complex social and demographic problems which caused them to be adopted.

[BunnysMomma]

Originally posted by kate-astrophe

But you would not have become parents (in most cases) if these ills did not exist. I don't think it's unreasonable to give back in some meaningful way.

I ask you, then, why is raising the children that we adopt in loving, supportive homes, with good values, to become caring, responsible people not enough? You may not see it so, but trust me, when you tell an adoptive parent that they OWE the world something because they adopted, you are undermining that family.

Additionally, who gets to decide what the "meaningful way" adoptive families are supposed to "give back" is? Don't we get the same right to decide how we should contribute to the world that other families have? Including the right not to contribute if that's what we desire?

Let me put it this way. My husband has the job he currently has because the pervious employee was fired for using drugs while at work. My husband and I directly benefitted from this man's misfortune and pain. Must we now direct time, money, and emotional energy toward helping those with substance abuse problems merely because my husband wouldn't have gotten his job if someone else hadn't had hard luck? I know that's not a perfect analogy, but I think it works.

Wilma:)

[gristastic]

You know... As an outsider looking in, I have to point out to all of you that the amt of defensiveness and tension you've all generated btwn the birth and adoptive parents leads me to believe that the adoption "picture" is less than perfect.

You're all so quick to jump on someone who tells you that "giving up a child isn't as easy as you think it is" yet none of you are willing to give, just a little, and acknowledge that someone else had to go through pain for you to be happy. Is this truely what you believe, or simply an emotional defense to something you don't WANT to believe?

[EFmom]

Where did any of us say that birthmothers don't go through pain?:scratch I think we would all agree that for the vast majority of birthmothers, it must be extremely painful. I suspect that most of us think about our children's birthmothers fairly frequently.

I also don't think anyone here has said adoption is "perfect." :scratch

You know, calling people "defensive" is one of my very favorite psychobabble insults. Because really, no matter how unfounded the claim, you can't defend yourself or you'd be acting all defensive...

[BunnysMomma]

Originally posted by gristastic
leads me to believe that the adoption "picture" is less than perfect.


Umm, yeah. I think I said two or three times that adoption isn't perfect.

I am fully aware that making a decision for adoption is painful for birth parents. But I don't cause their pain, and I can't atone for it.

Wilma:)

[kate-astrophe]

Originally posted by EFmom
We did not cause these children to be conceived. We did not cause whatever underlying social problems caused them to be placed for adoption, and in fact, the underlying problems themselves vary with the type of adoptions we have, and perhaps even with each particular adoption.

I'm not saying that you caused anything, or that anything is your fault.

If a woman decides to place her child for adoption, that is her decision. I think that decision needs to be respected.

I"m not disrespecting her decision, I'm saying that her decision is not being made in a societal vaccumm. I wrote before of the subtle and unintentional coercions. It's would be nice if all young women in a crisis pregancy had their heads on straight, so to speak. But most of them are very vulnerable, and they want to redeem themselves by doing something good.

Through my adoption experience, I have become much more aware of how many children worldwide are living in orphanages, without families. I do what I can to make the lives of children who will likely never get adopted better.

See? You agree with me. I'm not asking you to fix the world. I'm not asking that you become peace corp volunteers or take in a single mother. There are many small things that a person can do to ease the suffering of the world. As I've said before, it's everyone's responsibiltiy to make the world a better place. I just thought that since the people who adopt internaltionally are more aware of the conditions in forgien contries, they would know how to best direct their efforts.

Let me put it this way. My husband has the job he currently has because the pervious employee was fired for using drugs while at work. My husband and I directly benefitted from this man's misfortune and pain. Must we now direct time, money, and emotional energy toward helping those with substance abuse problems merely because my husband wouldn't have gotten his job if someone else hadn't had hard luck? I know that's not a perfect analogy, but I think it works.

I'm offended that you consider somene losing their job because of drug abuse to be akin to a crisis pregnancy and placement of a child. That man did not give you a gift that he will suffer for his whole life. It's a JOB, not a CHILD. There's a world of difference. but you're entitled to your opinion.

[Amazlilith]

Originally posted by BunnysMomma
I ask you, then, why is raising the children that we adopt in loving, supportive homes, with good values, to become caring, responsible people not enough? You may not see it so, but trust me, when you tell an adoptive parent that they OWE the world something because they adopted, you are undermining that family.

Additionally, who gets to decide what the "meaningful way" adoptive families are supposed to "give back" is? Don't we get the same right to decide how we should contribute to the world that other families have? Including the right not to contribute if that's what we desire?


Thank you!

kate-astrophe,
Some of your comments are generalizations, to say the very least. I personally know a few bmoms who are not suffering in pain their whole lives.

kate-astrophe & gristastic,

Have you adopted? Have you ever been in our shoes? If you had you would understand the feelings of anger, defensiveness and hurt that the words have written caused.

[kate-astrophe]

Originally posted by Laurel
So what can we do to change this? Is it even possible? I'm asking a genuine question here, because I agree that this is an important issue. I do think this kind of pain is something you really can't fathom until you experience it (much like infertility, I imagine). I know that even I, having witnessed some of those moments at placement, can't really comprehend the depth of what she experienced.

I dn't know if it's even possible. Birthmothers tend to keep their grief under wraps, even from their closest friends and relatives. It feels so shameful. Part of the problem is the unwillingness of people to listen to birthmothers, dimsissing them as uneducated, or worse, or having an axe to grind and a chip on their shoulder. If birthmothers spoke louder and in larger numbers, at least the pain and grief they experience would be better known and not so easily minimized.

I applaud your honesty in the letter you wrote for the expectant mom considering adoption. She'll hear plenty "our birthmom is so happy with her decision and everything is rosy" viewpoints.

-Kate

[hhurd]

gristastic, I have been saying throughout this thread that adoption is sometimes less than perfect, so please count me among those who are willing to "give a little..."

[kate-astrophe]

Originally posted by Amazlilith

Some of your comments are generalizations, to say the very least. I personally know a few bmoms who are not suffering in pain their whole lives.

Having been involved in birthparent support for six years, I feel I can draw a few conclusions.

Originally posted by Amazlilith

Have you adopted? Have you ever been in our shoes? If you had you would understand the feelings of anger, defensiveness and hurt that the words have written caused.

I'm sorry you are angered by what I've said. But your hurt and definsiveness doesn't invalidate my viewpoints. Wouldn't the world be a better place if we all listened to each other without pulling the "you're making me angry, therefore you must be wrong" line? I think i've done a good job of explaining myself without getting my emotions involved, even though some things said on this thread have hurt me greatly. I can only think of one instance that I let my hust feelings leak into my post. Debate is not about feelings. It's about ideas.

[hhurd]

You have done a good job explaining yourself kate-astrophe, even if I don't agree with all of it. I really liked your last post, especially about debate not being about feelings but about ideas. Should be required reading here on MDC!

[kate-astrophe]

Originally posted by hhurd
You have done a good job explaining yourself kate-astrophe, even if I don't agree with all of it. I really liked your last post, especially about debate not being about feelings but about ideas. Should be required reading here on MDC!

:blush Thanks!

[BunnysMomma]

Originally posted by kate-astrophe

I'm offended that you consider somene losing their job because of drug abuse to be akin to a crisis pregnancy and placement of a child. That man did not give you a gift that he will suffer for his whole life. It's a JOB, not a CHILD. There's a world of difference. but you're entitled to your opinion.

Good grief. Did I not say it's not a perfect analogy? Do you SERIOUSLY, after reading what I've said in this thread about children and my concern for them, think that I equate a job with a child? It's an analogy. It's supposed to draw a parallel between two situations, not equate them. I used that analogy to point out that, by your logic, people are responsible for ameliorating the social ills that might somehow benefit tham. I used that analogy to point out how ridiculous your position would seem when seen in another light.

I don't think you seriously think I equate jobs with children. I think you said that to be hurtful.

I believe that people have a responsibility to make the world a better place. But I don't think it's up to me, or you, or anyone else to tell them how to do that or to tell them that they OWE society something more than other people do simply because others might experience misfortune. I also believe that if people choose to do nothing to make the world a better place, it's unfortunate, but so be it.

Wilma

[kate-astrophe]

Originally posted by BunnysMomma
Good grief. Did I not say it's not a perfect analogy? Do you SERIOUSLY, after reading what I've said in this thread about children and my concern for them, think that I equate a job with a child? It's an analogy. It's supposed to draw a parallel between two situations, not equate them.

Okay, I posted in anger. I felt that what you said belittled my point of view. I see where you're coming from with your analogy. But I still don't agree that it applies.

Originally posted by BunnysMomma
I used that analogy to point out how ridiculous your position would seem when seen in another light.

I never called your position ridiculous. I wish you would give me the same respect.

Adoptive parents are benefitting from another person's pain, and in a more general sense, from the social ills that plague the world. IMO it only follows that they should make some attempt to ease some of this pain.

This was my original statement. I stand by it. You don't have to agree.

Let's agree to disagree, and leave it at that, shall we? You can even have the last word if you like.

[BunnysMomma]

Well, since you invited me to have the last word, I'll take you up on your offer. I apologize for calling your position ridiculous. I, too, posted in anger. I'll agree to disagree.

Wilma:)

[Amazlilith]

Adoptive parents are benefitting from another person's pain :scratch

The statement in itself makes adoption sound malicious. But fine, we will agree to disagree.

[kate-astrophe]

Originally posted by Amazlilith
The statement in itself makes adoption sound malicious. But fine, we will agree to disagree.

I'm sorry you think it makes adoption sound malicious. I think it's simply the reality of the situation. The fact that people adopt the child doesn't mitigate the pain that caused the child to be orphaned or abandoned or placed for adoption in the first place.

BTW, I was speaking to bunnysmomma about agreeing to disagree. If someone else brings up an issue with one of my posts that I haven't discussed yet, as you have, I'm going to chime in.

-Kate

[Leatherette]

Adoptive parents also alleviate the pain of children who would otherwise not have homes, or would have abusive homes. Nothing is completely black and white.

I have a friend who is 95. She was abandoned by her mother at a very young age, and taken in by relatives who did not really want her and abused her terribly. She still cries when she talks about her childhood. She would have loved to be adopted.

I realize that if someone's experience has primarily been with birthmoms, they will know their pain better. But that doesn't mean that the other people involved don't have pain and don't matter. I would never say that birthmoms have it easy. But neither do couples who want children but cannot give birth to them, or children waiting for families.

L.

[Laurel]

Originally posted by gristastic
[B]the amt of defensiveness and tension you've all generated btwn the birth and adoptive parents leads me to believe that the adoption "picture" is less than perfect.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I haven't felt like this has been about adoptive parents vs. birthparents at all. It's been about society's expectations of adoptive parents and whether or not those expectations are realistic or fair. The discussion of birthparents has been more incidental to that overall theme, and IMO the bparent portion of it has been quite respectful.

As far as the perfectness of adoption, sure it's less than perfect, but isn't any life circumstance, especially where our relationships with family and others are concerned? Emotions run high when a topic is deeply personal.

I have enjoyed this discussion, including Kate's comments--some of which I have agreed with and some of which I haven't.

[pugmadmama]

Originally posted by kate-astrophe
...But you would not have become parents (in most cases) if these ills did not exist. I don't think it's unreasonable to give back in some meaningful way...

Why the assumption that adoptive parents are not giving back in "some meaningful way"?

In anycase, raising a child in a loving, supportive enviroment so that they can become a productive citizen is "giving back" in a meaningful way. I would argue it is one of the most meaningful ways of "giving back".

Why should adoptive parents have any more of a responsibility to "atone" for societies ills than any of the rest of us?

I'm not an adoptive parent, but I am offended by this idea that adoptive parents somehow "owe" society more than the rest of us do or that they need to be reminded by strangers on the internet of their obligation to society.

[kate-astrophe]

Originally posted by pugmadmama
In anycase, raising a child in a loving, supportive enviroment so that they can become a productive citizen is "giving back" in a meaningful way. I would argue it is one of the most meaningful ways of "giving back".

This is true. It would be nice if every child who is adopted is being saved from a horrible fate. But in many cases, especially private domestic cases, they are only being saved from the next couple waiting in line. Or they're being saved from a young single woman who feels incredible pressure to not parent.

As much as my attitude annoys you, the attitude that adoptive parents are the heroic saviors annoys me just as much. Adoption is an industry. Adoptive parents, in their quest to build families, are filling a need, but they are not motivated by altruism. They are being given a gift of a child that was born to someone else.

Originally posted by pugmadmama
Why should adoptive parents have any more of a responsibility to "atone" for societies ills than any of the rest of us?

Wow, atoning is what people do when they've sinned. I never said that adoptive parents had done anything wrong.

I still think, and flame away if you want, that when you benefit from the ills of society, you should make some effort to rectify those ills, in gratitude for what you've been given. This is true in every area of life, not just adoption. Free trade, immigrant labor, you name it, every day, as Americans, we benefit from someone else's misfortune.

I said it before, and I'll say it again, it's EVERYONE"S responsibility to make our world a better place.


Originally posted by pugmadmama
I'm not an adoptive parent, but I am offended by this idea that adoptive parents somehow "owe" society more than the rest of us do or that they need to be reminded by strangers on the internet of their obligation to society.

I am participating in a public discussion. I'm not telling people what to do. I am sharing my opinion. No one has to agree with me. I'm sorry you're offended.

[gristastic]

Originally posted by Amazlilith

kate-astrophe & gristastic,

Have you adopted? Have you ever been in our shoes? If you had you would understand the feelings of anger, defensiveness and hurt that the words have written caused.

How presumptuous to think I have no knowlege of the situation. You know nothing of my life. I asked only that you take a look at your own, as a birth mother does this daily.

Edited to say:

It's obvious to me that my attempt at expanding your understanding of adoption beyond your own gainful experience has failed miserablly. I have nothing else to add so I won't be returning to this forum.

[Amazlilith]

I feel like I need to apologize. My situation is very different than the ones you are talking about. Birthmothers who willingly give up their children or leave them because of outside pressure must I am sure go through much pain. I never meant to take away from that. I don't know about your lives or those you have helped.

My strong feeling come from my own daughter's situation. She was taken at birth because her bmom was high during most, if not all, of her pregnancy. And after she was born she did nothing to change her habits or lifestyle to get her back. My daughter spent the first months of her life fighting the effects of how her bmom acted during her pregnancy. I worry everyday of what she will have to go through in her life, if the drug have permenantly done something to her. I think that she is a beautiful, healthy, and intelligent girl and only pray that her life, with our love and help, will be wonderful. I cried many nights when we got her because I just couldn't understand how her bmom couldn't or wouldn't change for her. I have always felt that my joy was like a double edged sword. We got this wonderful gift only because someone had destroyed their life.

And I do have that sense of gratitude for having received such a precious gift. I think daily of ways that I can give back. I constantly wished that I had the ability to work with pregnant teens and women in general to help make there lives better. I write my social worker often and thank her for her part in bring me my daughter and I pray that her bmom gets the help she need so that she can live a healthy life.

So I guess we do agree on the bmom issue. I am again so sorry that I didn't really understand what you were saying.

[kate-astrophe]

Originally posted by Amazlilith
My strong feeling come from my own daughter's situation. She was taken at birth because her bmom was high during most, if not all, of her pregnancy. And after she was born she did nothing to change her habits or lifestyle to get her back. My daughter spent the first months of her life fighting the effects of how her bmom acted during her pregnancy. I worry everyday of what she will have to go through in her life, if the drug have permenantly done something to her. I think that she is a beautiful, healthy, and intelligent girl and only pray that her life, with our love and help, will be wonderful. I cried many nights when we got her because I just couldn't understand how her bmom couldn't or wouldn't change for her. I have always felt that my joy was like a double edged sword. We got this wonderful gift only because someone had destroyed their life.


This is so touching. Thanks for sharing your story. I can really understand your perspective now. It always blows me away to think of a mother who treats her child's life (and her own life, for that matter) with so little regard. :crying Best of luck to you and your daughter.

-Kate

[pugmadmama]

Originally posted by kate-astrophe
...As much as my attitude annoys you, the attitude that adoptive parents are the heroic saviors annoys me just as much...

I sure hope that wasn't aimed at me. I said "raising a child in a loving, supportive enviroment so that they can become a productive citizen is 'giving back' in a meaningful way." That applies to all parents, not just adoptive parents. And it's got nothing to do with being "heroic saviors", which, of course, I never said.


Originally posted by kate-astrophe
...Adoptive parents, in their quest to build families, are filling a need, but they are not motivated by altruism...

I disagree. I think all good parents operate out of a certain sense of altruism. What is more selfless and unselfish than dedicating your life to raising up another human being?


Originally posted by kate-astrophe
...I still think, and flame away if you want, that when you benefit from the ills of society, you should make some effort to rectify those ills, in gratitude for what you've been given. This is true in every area of life, not just adoption. Free trade, immigrant labor, you name it, every day, as Americans, we benefit from someone else's misfortune...

So, I can safey assume that you've stopped by the "I'm Pregnant" board to remind those women to "give back" to society? And the "Work at Home" board? How about the "Spritiuality" board? Well, have you?

No, of course you haven't. For some reason, you're choosing to focus on adoptive parents. I think it is truly obnoxious to stop by random internet sites and "remind" a specific group of people that they have an obligation to give back. In fact, why don't you try spending less time lecturing to others and more time doing the actual work of giving back yourself?

[EFmom]

So, I can safey assume that you've stopped by the "I'm Pregnant" board to remind those women to "give back" to society?

pugmadmama, you rock. :bow

[hhurd]

kate-astrophe made her points with civility, can those of us who disagree with her try to respond in kind? Verbal bullying doesn't "rock".

Methinks we dost protest too much!

[EFmom]

Telling a group of other people that they need to assume some imaginary burden sounds to me like verbal bullying.

pugmadmama states that she is not an adoptive parent, so how can she protest too much?
:scratch

[pugmadmama]

Originally posted by hhurd
kate-astrophe made her points with civility, can those of us who disagree with her try to respond in kind? Verbal bullying doesn't "rock".

Methinks we dost protest too much!

I think trying to lay a guilt trip on adoptive parents about how they've benefitted from "society's ills" is bullying behavior. How can an adoptive parent respond to that without sounding ungrateful? They can't!

I'm not an adoptive parent. I'm a woman who doesn't like to see other women get lectured on their behavior as if they were ungrateful children at a birthday party.

[pugmadmama]

EFMom, Thank you! I'm not an adoptive mother but I get so sick of hearing people lecture adoptive parents on issues of gratitude. Every good parent I know, no matter how their child came to them, is very grateful for that child and very aware of their need to improve society on that child's behalf.

What should we do, have adoptive parents had in forms at the end of the year proving they did 10% more volunteer work than parents who are biologically related to their children? Or maybe we should just dock adoptive parents pay to make sure they are giving money to charities?

Conscientious parents (& I think that's pretty much everyone here at Mothering.com) are already giving back. Stopping by selected groups to "remind" them to work on "society's ills" is just rude. If someone is really worried about parents not giving back, then start a general thread in Politics or Spritituality.

[hhurd]

"I'm a woman who doesn't like to see other women get lectured on their behavior as if they were ungrateful children at a birthday party. "

So you thought you'd lecture her back? I don't like to see other women get lectured at either, which is why I responded to YOUR post.

Listen, I'm not saying you need to agree with her posts, just disagree with civility. Describing her, or her words, as "truly obnoxious" is uncivil. Lecturing her on how she shouldn't be lecturing other people is contradictory, to say the least. There's no need to bring the discussion to that level just because you dislike another point of view.

[kate-astrophe]

I thought this thread was over! Imagine my surprise!

Originally posted by pugmadmama
So, I can safey assume that you've stopped by the "I'm Pregnant" board to remind those women to "give back" to society? And the "Work at Home" board? How about the "Spritiuality" board? Well, have you?

No, of course you haven't.

Why should I? I made a perfectly valid response to a thread already in progress. I have to go and open up new threads in all these other forums just to be "fair" and satisfy you?

For some reason, you're choosing to focus on adoptive parents.

Because that's what was relevant to the thread I was posting on.

I think it is truly obnoxious to stop by random internet sites and "remind" a specific group of people that they have an obligation to give back.

This is a public forum. I have every right to post my opinion. You have every right to disagree with me. You can call me obnoxious for what I believe, and you can call me a bully for having the gall to post my opinion. (although you might want to review the user's agreement for this board; if you wanted to call me names, you should have PMed me.) BTW, no one can make you feel guilty without your permission. So why am I to blame?

In fact, why don't you try spending less time lecturing to others and more time doing the actual work of giving back yourself?

It was never my intention to lecture anyone. I can't control how people take what I say.

You don't know how I spend my time or how I give back to society. Apparently, the fact that I have a daughter and am raising her in a gentle and natural way is enough. I don't happen to think it's nearly enough.

-Kate

[pugmadmama]

Originally posted by hhurd
...So you thought you'd lecture her back? I don't like to see other women get lectured at either, which is why I responded to YOUR post...

I'm not lecturing her, I'm telling her I think she should back off. Two entirely different things. Do you see me stopping by threads lecturing entire groups of people on how they should feel about how they became parents and what responsibilities they should take on because of it ? No, you don't.

I think this poster is taking advantadge of the societal expectation that adoptive parents should feel nothing but grateful, 24/7. She thinks she can lecture adoptive parents in relative saftey and I'm simply not going to stand by and watch it.


Originally posted by kate-astrophe
...You don't know how I spend my time or how I give back to society...

And you have absolutely no idea how the adoptive mothers here spend their time or give back to society. But that didn't stop you from stopping by and lecturing them on how to behave...now do you understand that it doesn't feel too good to have somone make assumptions about you and dictate what your behavior should be? My hope is that you'll consider that the next time you want to drop in on a thread and tell an entire group of people how they should be spending their time.

[pugmadmama]

Originally posted by kate-astrophe
It was never my intention to lecture anyone. I can't control how people take what I say. ...

Is it your position that you were not lecturing about how adoptive parents should behave when you said the following?

Originally posted by kate-astrophe
...But you would not have become parents (in most cases) if these ills did not exist. I don't think it's unreasonable to give back in some meaningful way...

Originally posted by kate-astrophe
...Adoptive parents are benefitting from another person's pain, and in a more general sense, from the social ills that plague the world. IMO it only follows that they should make some attempt to ease some of this pain...


One more thing, since it's happened twice now, I'm going to say something. You are using your replies to me try and attribute things to me that I never said. You suggested that my attitude is that adoptive parents are "heroic saviors" and you suggested that I had said that raising children in a gentle way is "enough" as far as giving back to society goes.

Of course, I never said any such thing about adoptive parents being "heroic saviors". (but I do think your attempt to inject that into the conversation reveals something about your motivations in this thread) As for raising children, I think for some parents (adoptive or otherwise), that is enough. It's all they can do to raise a child to be a caring, loving, thoughtful citizen of the world and that is no small contribution. For others, their responsibility to society is much higher and goes far beyond the boundaries of their home.

My point is, I don't think judging groups of people and lecturing them on what their contribution should be is constructive. I think each of us should give as much as we can. Period. And I don't have to go after select groups to make that point.

[sharqi]

i have a hard time understanding why adoptive parents need to give back as well. my child was taken away from her birthmother due to abuse. her birthmom was going through a terrible time. i felt really sorry for her, and really angry at her. i did wish sometimes that i could adopt her as well (oh, would that have been a nightmare!). i did my best to provide support for the birthmom and for my foster child. the birthmom eventually signed her over, because she had enough trust in me that her daughter would be happy with us.

and raising a kid, well we all know (most of us, anyhow) how that goes. i "give back" when i can, but it's mostly done informally with people in my circle of friends & family. i find it ridiculous that someone who is not me decides that i should be giving back in a "meaningful" way. not only did i have to endure not becoming pregnant, and the subsequent fertility treatments, there was also the trauma of caring for a traumatized infant and the very real fear of her returning to her birthmom at any time.

i don't think i need to give back any more. i have a kid to care for.

[steph]

first of all, everybody take a deep breath.... whew!

Kat, I want to thank you for your honesty and personal perspective as a birthmother. I don't think anyone here belittles the emotional pain - nor have we (adoptive parents) experienced it first hand.

I just want to point out, that in the adoption triad, everyone suffers and everyone benefits. Maybe not equally, but nonetheless. Birthmothers suffer in ways Kat has so eloquently posted, adopted children suffer in their own way - with whatever doubt, uncertainty or unresolved questions they may have about the circumstances regarding their placement and birthfamily. And adoptive parents (usually though not always) the pain of infertility. While we may be able to paint a pretty picture of a socially acceptable, responsible, stable family waiting for a child, there is usually a high emotional cost and feeling of failure at not being able to conceive or bear a biological child. Those feelings don't just go away - when we are blessed with an adoption. They may diminish, but can flair up when an unsuspecting or insensitive person makes a comment about their childs "real mother", or in my case when they comment on my dd's beautiful eyes (brown) and search my face (green eyes here). Of course adoptive parents receive the most obvious benefit, a child. But the child benefits by receiving a family and the birthmother benefits by being absolved of the responisibility of raising a child.

I don't really agree that adoptive parents have more responisibility to do more than be loving and supportive parents - that is alot in itself. But I do understand the place where that idea is comming from.

Additionally, ideally, all agencies should do more to be emotionally supportive of birthmothers for the long haul, not just the short term. No one should belittle the loss or guilt or shame - it's only unfortunate that those emotions are so prevelent. In my communications with dd's birthmother, I try to be as sensitive and loving as possible - I can only hope she recognizes the sincerity behind it.

[T. Elena]

Wow. I can't believe how much time (time I don't have, really) I spent reading this whole thread today. But it was very compelling, and I appreciate the candor and passion so many of you brought to it.

I am a mother twice over, once giving birth to my son (4 y.o.) after experiencing infertility, and once via adoption with my daughter (now 3 months old). We were lucky enough to spend time with our daughter's birthmother, an illegal immigrant living and working in this country. She was in a very difficult situation, and while she'd be the first to enumerate the financial and emotional challenges she was facing, her number one reason for making an adoption plan was that she wanted her child to have a father (and the birthfather was not someone willing or able to do that). She didn't have a father growing up; she didn't want her child to go through the same thing.

I think about Mia's birthmom every day, and write letters and send pictures every month. This experience has been a profound one for me and my husband -- joyful and painful. We were able to spend quite a bit of time with Mia's birthmom both before and shortly after placement, and the conversations I had with her will be with me for a lifetime.

I expected the disparities in our emotional and economic resources to be stark; I expected to be reminded of all that separates me (a white, wealthy American) from various people living very different lives from mine -- people who, because of their skin color, physical health, economic circumstances, country of birth, and so on -- have less than I do. What I did not expect was to look across that chasm and see my own reflection.

Mia's birthmom and I have a lot in common, things that I won't go into much detail about here, but suffice it to say that both of our growing up experiences played into the circumstances that brought us *both* to adoption. If someone wants an elaboration, PM me.

Okay, what point am I trying to make here? I think I'm trying to say something about how the adoption experience has, for me, underscored my belief in the sameness and interconnectedness of people -- of how much we all have in common, how interdependent we all are (for better and for worse), even when the circumstances of our lives can be so very different. It has been a beautiful and difficult experience, but one for which I'm extremely grateful. I feel the experience has helped me see my world and my life in a more truthful way.

I don't think adoptive parents have a greater responsibility to "right" the "wrongs" from which we "benefit." I believe that every person on this globe is profoundly interconnected and interdependent and that *everyone* benefits when we work for greater justice and peace. I believe that starts with ourselves and our families but should not end there.

You could call this enlightened self-interest, but I don't think that term really captures the spiritual depth of it.

[kate-astrophe]

Originally posted by T. Elena
I don't think adoptive parents have a greater responsibility to "right" the "wrongs" from which we "benefit." I believe that every person on this globe is profoundly interconnected and interdependent and that *everyone* benefits when we work for greater justice and peace. I believe that starts with ourselves and our families but should not end there.

This is so beautifully put. I think if I had your gift with words, the thread would never have gotten so messy.

-Kate

[Leonor]

I was quiet in this thread, but after this one, I just need to say something. I hope I don't pass as judgmental, because it's not my intention. I just want to take a chance to explain my ideas better, which were misunderstood and seemed to hurt some feelings.

Originally posted by T. Elena
She was in a very difficult situation, and while she'd be the first to enumerate the financial and emotional challenges she was facing, her number one reason for making an adoption plan was that she wanted her child to have a father (and the birthfather was not someone willing or able to do that). She didn't have a father growing up; she didn't want her child to go through the same thing.

This birthmother seems a good person with good moral intentions, but trapped by circumstance and mistaken ideas.

So many successful people in the world without a father. There is a list of rich and famous somewhere online. And so many criminals and scary creeps had a traditional white family. It was not the absence of a father that caused the abuse in her life, it was the lack of moral values by the people that raised her and the prejudice of people around her. Has someone told her this?

Has someone told her how little it actually costs to raise a baby, if you breastfeed and carry him in a sling, under your coat? Has someone told her that she wouldn't need cots, prams, tons of clothes for the baby? That she could sleep with the baby, bath with the baby and wear the baby? Has someone told her that not even diapers might be needed? Has someone told her that babies need no toys, that they prefer one to one attention with loving adults and to spend time outside, in a park for instance, and they prefer to play with mommy's real keys than the plastic alternatives? And that toddlers can spend a good time playing with cups, pans, wooden spoons, water, flour, sorting socks, and will drop any toy to play hide and seek with mommy?

And more importantly, why not invite this birthmother to live with you and provide her reassurance and security? Provide her with an extended family? The beautiful safe family she didn't have herself and the family she wants for her child!

You could have helped her to bond with her child, teach her the natural and beautiful way to raise babies, help each other with childcare and housework, who knows help her start a work at home business, sewing cloth diapers for instance, or get a part time job. You seemed to have such in common!

She could have had your husband as a father figure, and you could have convinced her a "real father" is not important, but a positive male role model is, and definitely better none than a bad one!


I believe that every person on this globe is profoundly interconnected and interdependent and that *everyone* benefits when we work for greater justice and peace. I believe that starts with ourselves and our families but should not end there.

Yes, beautifully put. I believe this too. And you are a very caring person and you are doing good by providing your adopted child with a loving family. But you probably didn't consider alternatives to just adopting the child, and you could have done, in my opinion, twice the good.

I felt people reacted very defensively when I suggested adopting the birthmother as well as well as her baby. I understand why, but I never wanted to assume adopting parents are responsible for the mothers too when adopting her babies. They are also not responsible for any children of the world either until they *choose* to. And I was suggesting an alternative to adoption, which was helping these birthmothers that give their children away worried they are not good enough, not assuming it *should* be done, but that it *could* be done, and that few consider this option.

T. Elena, this is just an idea. Instead of sending pictures of the child to her birthmother, why don't you invite her to be part of your family? Talk about true interconnection!

[T. Elena]

Leo,

This birthmother was not ill-informed. She has another child, by another father, and knows full well what's involved (and not involved) in parenting. I absolutely cannot imagine she would want to come live with us. For starters, doing so would take her away from her older child or take her older child away from his father (someone different from Mia's birthfather) and that man's extended family, who provide much care and support to that boy.

She also was not raised with "bad morals" or however you put it. Her father had incredible problems, but she was not raised by him. Instead, she was raised by a network of her mother's female relatives who -- judging by what a caring and generous person she grew up to be -- must have done something right. (Oh, and on another note, substance addiction isn't the same thing as lack of moral values. Again, another extremely complex topic, and one for another discussion for another thread.)

She also does not need to be taught about low-cost parenting methods. As I stated, she's an illegal immigrant, and like most illegal immigrants, she comes from a very poor country where parenting in generally done without expensive equipment.

Please, I beg you not to make assumptions about this woman, her family members, or any other specific individual involved in a specific adoption scenario when you don't have anything close to all of the facts. These situations are very complicated and each is unique. I haven't even scratched the surface of what was going on in my daughter's birthmom's life that led her to the decision to make an adoption plan, but believe me, she had enormous problems. You simply don't know what you're talking about regarding her life.

Respectfully yours --
T.E.

[Leonor]

Originally posted by T. Elena
This birthmother was not ill-informed. She has another child, by another father, and knows full well what's involved (and not involved) in parenting. I absolutely cannot imagine she would want to come live with us. For starters, doing so would take her away from her older child or take her older child away from his father (someone different from Mia's birthfather) and that man's extended family, who provide much care and support to that boy.


I don't understand. So she lives with the father of her first child why didn't she keep her second child?

I didn't make assumptions, I made guesses. If you tell people half the story, people might have a different picture in their minds than the true story.

[T. Elena]

Oh dear. Maybe I should never have used Mia's birthmom as an example here, since I'm uncomfortable spelling out too many details of her life in this context. Leo, I will PM you (and anyone else who is terribly curious) about the situation.

[Laurel]

My son's bmom also placed primarily because she wanted her baby to have a father and his bfather couldn't fit that role. IMO, the only thing that really matters here is what she wanted. She was well aware that people can parent babies w/o a father around. In her situation, she had a happy upbringing and had been extremely close to her father, but he had died several years earlier when she was in her teens. She wanted her baby to have what she had. To me, it doesn't matter what society thinks or says, it only matters what she wanted.

Leonor, you are still coming from the assumption that adoption is the worst possible choice, and that's where I just have to disagree. It's a difficult, painful choice that has ramifications for everyone involved, but that doesn't make it the wrong choice.

T. Elena, your thoughts were beautiful and ITW witht everything you said!

[pugmadmama]

Originally posted by Leonor
...This birthmother seems a good person with good moral intentions, but trapped by circumstance and mistaken ideas.
...And more importantly, why not invite this birthmother to live with you and provide her reassurance and security? Provide her with an extended family? The beautiful safe family she didn't have herself and the family she wants for her child!...

Who are you to tell this birthmother that her idea about wanting her child to have a home with a mother and father is "mistaken"? I have things that are very important for my child to have that I'm sure others would think are not so important. That doesn't mean I am mistaken, it means that different things are important to different people.

Do you really not see how adopting a baby and "adopting" an adult/entire family are two entirely different things? I think it is nothing short of bizarre that you are advocating this as a wide-scale idea.

Here's my question to you...are you advocating that everyone should adopt a homeless family instead of having their own biological children? If not, why not?

[Leatherette]

I am with T. Elena....I can't provide a clear "defense" for my daughter's adoption without divulging details that are not for others to know. Out of respect for my daughter and her birthfamily, I will have to stop trying to defend our family and the choices we have made.

I understand that some people are against adoption. Yes, I have learned that. I get it.

L.

[ramblinrose]

We adopted our daughter from Guatemala. I have no doubts about the legality of her adoption. We researched and used an extremely reputable agency..we have photos and information about birthfamily. We plan to try and establish contact with them.

The media has done a good job and perpetuating the "horror" stories. http://guatadopt.com provides lots of information on adoptions from Guatemala and the negative and false media potrayal. This site also has a link to Families without Borders under organizations which is another educational site about Guatemalan adoptions.

The point being...you can't believe everything you here in the media.

Mommy to two beautiful kids, age 6 and 14 months

[grisandole]

Wow, great thread, very informative. We are hoping to adopt, domesticlly, through our state. We're getting licensed for foster/adopt; so a child coming to us will have been taken by the state rather than "given up" most likely. I am adopting, even though I am not infertile, because there are many, many, children here who need families, and I want more children.......so it works out :) We have thought about this alot. No, my reasons aren't totally altrustic, as I want something in return- the amazing feeling of helping a child and giving them a family.

I've thought alot about adoption, and our society, and birthparents and adoptive parents and such. I do believe that some birthparents give up their children for the wrong reasons, that some are pushed to do so, and that our society does in fact contribute to birthparents placing children for adoption. Please note, I said *some* birthparents. There are some that make an informed decision. But, often when a single woman gets pregnant, they are told, sometimes subtly, sometimes overtly, to consider adoption. Some have it shoved down their throats. Adoption is seen as the altruistic, "right" thing to do. And that simply isn't always the case. I think this thinking, and this societal pressure, stems from our society seeing pregnancy and birth outside of a traditonal, middle-income, middle class situation as "bad" or something to be pitied. Even happily married, low-income pregnant women are usually seen with disdain- the comments begin'- "Pregnant again? How can you afford it?" "Haven't you heard of birth control?" "Must be on welfare" etc. Our society really frowns on having kids unless you are in the proper social and economic bracket. And I think this is reflected in the birthparent profile- how many birthparents are middle or upper middle class? Most are lower income or working class; they are led to believe that they can't afford and don't deserve to have children.

Now, this doesn't mean that adoptive parents are evil for adopting. I'm just pointing out that our society sets up these women to feel inadequate, and I think something needs to be done about that. Crisis preg. centers aren't the way to go, because they don't offer much support, and certainly have an agenda. We need to find a way to empower women and let them know that pregnancy and children are a good thing, something to be celebrated, not ashamed of. And that poor people deserve children, too.

The thing is, the first thing that pops into people heads when there's a young, unmarried, poor pregnant girl is "she should give it up for adoption" rather than "how can we help her?" and I think, we should focus on the helping rather than condemming. Fix the problem rather than ignore it. For example, my dh teaches high school. One of his student's is preg, she's 18. She was talking to him, and she's unsure of what to do- her mom isn't very supportive, her bf wants her to move in with him and have the baby, but her mom is against it; my dh was just talking to her, and somewhat jokingly told her that we were almost licensed to be foster parents, and that in the future we were going to take preg. teens (we aren't set up for it now, house is too small), and if she decided to give up her baby we would take it. She asked if she decided to have it, would we foster her baby if she needed help (not sure why she asked). He said yes. Now, I was pissed at him. This is a prime example of pushing adoption. I don't agree with that at all. He should have offered her support on having the baby, since that's what she wanted- she was trying to figure out logistics, and how she could do it. He offered to take the problem off her hands. :splat Now, my dh was very well intended, he didn't want to steal her baby or anything. He wanted to help, and thought she'd appreciate the offer and "put it out there". But I think by even "putting it out there" it sets a tone- it says "hey, my wife and I are good people, great parents, we'd be a great family for your baby" which, by default, says "you are just a single young poor parent, by yourself, why don't you give your baby a good home?" which is offensive, wrong, and makes the mom doubt herself.

Well, I've rambled enough. Just to clarify, I certainly don't think every birthmom has been coerced and brainwashed, and I dont' think adoptive parents are bad. But, I did want to throw my thoughts out there.....


Kristi

[Leatherette]

I think the key here is not to make assumptions about any type of family - poor or rich, older parents or younger parents, two-parent or one-parent, adoptive family or birth family, one child or many children.

Discussing individuals in terms of generalizations takes away their humanity.

L.

[T. Elena]

Amen. Every adoption situation is unique and complex. All involve losses (and hopefully gains), usually for every member of the triad.

I think it's tempting for some people not very familiar with adoption (and I'm not trying to point any fingers here) who, with their vague knowledge -- based partly on anecdotes and skewed media representations of adoption -- see some of the losses of adoption and think that surely if adoption involves this kind of pain, there must be something fundamentally wrong with adoption and the choices made by birthparents and adoptive parents.

There are an infinite number of grays in adoption. But -- guess what? -- that's life. In real life there isn't always an absolute good and an absolute bad choice to make. We all make the best choices we have, given our choices.

[Leonor]

When I said the birthmother was mistaken (for giving her child away with the reason she wanted a father for her and she couldn't provide one) I should have explained my thoughts better.

First, she could never know if she would find another man that could be a decent partner for her and a decent father for her child. Babies want breasts anyway.

Also, her child might not care for having a father and might resent not having being cared by her real mother. Who knows what she wants and what she will think when she grows up.

I am not against adoption. It's wonderful to provide a safe home for a child. But I still think helping birthparents that care for their children, if there's the chance, it's a better answer than adoption. It's what I would do if I could.

And I agree with you, Kristi, when you said:

But I think by even "putting it out there" it sets a tone- it says "hey, my wife and I are good people, great parents, we'd be a great family for your baby" which, by default, says "you are just a single young poor parent, by yourself, why don't you give your baby a good home?" which is offensive, wrong, and makes the mom doubt herself.

[AdinaL]

This is a tough thread for me for a lot of reasons.

It may be that I am looking at adopting in the hopefully near future.

I don't think that any person in an adoption situation, saying "I would be a great parent for you child" is really thinking that the birth mom is not adequate, or would be worse at parenting than the adoptive parents. Certainly I wouldn't be. I think that is said as more of an assurance to the mother giving up her child, that the child will be well taken care of. In some cases, it might even be assuring the birth mom that they are a good choice. But I certainly would not ever be implying that they were less able to parent their child than I was. Ever.

I think that one thing that people overlook, is that some birth moms don't want to raise their child. They do want to give the baby up. For some it is not a question, it is a decision that was a decision taht they wanted to make. Supporting women who want to keep their kids is a wonderful thing, and I certainly do help out the single moms that I know in any way I can. But who am I to say that they should have to keep their child if they honestly don't want to.

I don't know I am rambling.

[T. Elena]

Leonor, you should be aware that using the phrase "real mother" to describe a birth mother (as opposed to an adoptive mother) is considered outdated and insensitive in most adoption circles. I would take care not to use that term around folks involved in adoption unless you're prepared to offend. Personally, I consider Mia's birthmother a "real" mom in the sense that she took care of her in utereo and put much effort and heart into planning her future as best she could under the circumstances. She will continue to wish Mia the best in life and wants to keep in touch so that she knows how Mia is doing and so that they may, if Mia wishes, have contact later.

I consider myself Mia's "real" mother too. For the rest of my life, I will be there for Mia. I will give her real love, real kisses, real hugs, real guidance, real (gentle and positive) discipline. Even real breastmilk (since you had to bring up breasts in this context). I will give her real support as she works to understand her adoption experience, and I will support her if and when she wishes to contact her birthmother and/or establish a relationship with her.

It seems, Leonor, that your thinking on this issue is so different from mine that I feel no more interest in participating in this discussion any more. I think I will spend my time and energy on real mothering instead.

[Amazlilith]

Originally posted by T. Elena
Leonor, you should be aware that using the phrase "real mother" to describe a birth mother (as opposed to an adoptive mother) is considered outdated and insensitive in most adoption circles. I would take care not to use that term around folks involved in adoption unless you're prepared to offend.

It seems, Leonor, that your thinking on this issue is so different from mine that I feel no more interest in participating in this discussion any more. I think I will spend my time and energy on real mothering instead.

AMEN! I am done with this thread!

[kate-astrophe]

I feel the need to interject a few things even though I promised myself I wouldn't even *look* at this thread anymore.

Originally posted by AdinaL
I don't think that any person in an adoption situation, saying "I would be a great parent for you child" is really thinking that the birth mom is not adequate, or would be worse at parenting than the adoptive parents. Certainly I wouldn't be.

It's not intentional, of course. But sit in that seat among hundreds of dear birthmother letters and just try to hold on to a shred of confidence. These people have everything you don't. They have everything that society sees as necessary to raise a child well. The idea that the *best* thing for her baby would be to keep her first family together and healthy gets lost. Usually women don't have anyone to remind them of that.

I think that one thing that people overlook, is that some birth moms don't want to raise their child. They do want to give the baby up.

Do you mean that even if they had