Why should adoptees "get over it" but not prospective adopters?

Freckle Face

Dear Romany,

Great point, it doesn't make sense.

I'm for open records. I'll see you in PA in June. Hopefully, one day closed adoptions will be a thing of the past. You have a right to the names of your parents and your original birth certificate. Geez, its not rocket science. I don't know why people don't get it.

Possum

WOW - loving the misconceptions you've already received in your answers thus far.
As usual - people have NO grasp of what adoption is really about for the adoptee.
If they grew a brain - maybe they'd get close.
Sadly - I doubt it.

As an adoptee - I'm encouraged to keep my mouth shut - and just be grateful I wasn't aborted.
Sadly - for the government, the general public and those adoptive parents out there that are purely in adoption for their own gains - I refuse to comply with those requests.

I speak out so other adoptees don't have to put up with the b*llsh*t.
I advise others to do the same.

Serenity71

Good question... Old fashioned views by the public on adoption. The only people who really are shocked we have open contact with our children's Nmother are people who have never been touched by it. Yet they are the ones making the laws and choices for people on all sides of the triangle.

Sly

Well, I see that the replies to your question reflect all the common misconceptions about adoptee AND mothers! Wow! I am impressed that the speculators manage to be so inclusive!

You ask a really good question. What always surprises me is how often the natural mothers are the only ones working to help adoptees to change these laws and perceptions. Why aren't the adoptive families supporting the adoptees with their searches and their quest for opening the records and finding their natural mothers?

Reason also has little to do with legislation, unfortunately. There seems to be a sort of new feeling of hopefulness in the air with the recent election and a sort of return to reason and compassion. Maybe the mood is more amenable to some of the changes we would like to see with the changes in the policies of the past 8 years.

Mei-Ling

Good question. I don't know.

"As some other answerers stated, some birth parents have, for some reason, decided to not allow for the others to find them."

Not true. There is no consent for privacy on a relinquishment form - and if there is - I have yet to see a first mother claiming she actually did see that option.

Anha S

I think it has a lot to do with society's comfort level. During my search, a few people became really angry with me. After all, what right did I have to lie and connive to find information (that non adopted kids have access to, no problem) What if my first mother had a whole other family who didn't know about me!How dare I intrude into her life. Why couldn't I just be happy with what I had. I think it would have made an awful lot of people in my life more comfortable if they'd never had to know what really went on, how I felt, and just how much I didn't have a right to, unlike other children.

I think a lot of people find it easier to think of adoption as this hugs and puppies experience, where it is always this mythic gift to all parties rather than to take a good hard look at the whole process and see what is so fundementally wrong with it. Plus it seems easier as a whole to just dismiss anyone who's had a bad/lukewarm adoption experience as bitter and angry rather than to look at what they are angry about.

sizesmith

The laws are still in the dark ages when if a situation occurred where a woman became pregnant out of wedlock, she was sent somewhere to give birth, the child was taken, and she was sent home, and instructed to never talk about the situation.

These laws were designed to protect a woman who gave birth and placed a child, so she could have a "normal" (?????) life. Women were supposed to move on, marry, and have children with their husband, and never speak of placing a child to anyone. The "shame" that a woman would have had to go through if a child showed up would have been so frowned upon. Because she hadn't been able to talk about it, marriages would have broken up, and families would have been shattered. The thinking of people years ago was not accepted as it is today. Women were all supposed to be virgins when they married.

My mother-in-law placed a child 48 years ago. Her 3 other kids didn't know until 5 years ago, when she got a phone call and had been found (she was seriously ill, and in the hospital, and I believe the call saved her life). 1 daughter met the brother that year, the 2nd met him this year, and the other brother refuses to meet him. Mother-in-law is so glad he's been found, and is accepting. Son who was placed as a healthy attitude towards adoption, always knew he was adopted, and loves his adoptive "Mama" forever, and says he just doesn't know his first mom that well, yet. In many cases, years ago, this was normal for mothers to place a child, and NEVER know. With the help of the internet to find people, and with some states having maiden names on driver's licenses, it makes it easier to find women. One day, I believe it will be a requirement to have contact information on the child's records, for the child to know, unless it's dangerous for the child to know. Old time attitudes and laws are going to have to catch up with the times.

anastasia beaverhausen-the real1

republicans.

crappiefishergirl

As an adoptive mom, a friend of several adult adoptees, and a cousin to adoptees I have to say that adoptees are not "legall thwarted in their quest for their records and first families". At least not in the U.S.

As some other answerers stated, some birth parents have, for some reason, decided to not allow for the others to find them. They have that right to privacy whether we like it or not. Many more are more open to searches and have searched for their child.

All of my cousins and friends located their birth families or learned about them (1 cousin was not allowed to contact her birth father, but birth mom gave her the necessary details). Some have reconnected with their birth families, others simply wanted information and exchange Christmas cards.

tarapotter71

I don't think adoptees are being told to "get over it" necessarily. I have 2 beautiful adopted children who I had since they were babies as foster children. They both came from homes where the parents were drug users who abandoned the children so that they were taken into social services care. During the 3 year period before they became permanent wards of the state, I had set up dozens of visits between these children and their birth mothers, who never showed up for them. They did not want any further contact with these children for several reasons. One reason was that they were ashamed of their lifestyles and honestly felt that the children were better off without them. Another reason was that they did not want to change their lifestyle (drugs, alcohol, partying) and they knew that they would have to if they wanted their children back. In the end, both birth mothers decided to give the children away permanently, but they did not want the children contacting them. As a woman who also has 2 natural children, I know that they probably did this because they knew that if they saw the childen again they might regret what they did. I know that I could never let a child of mine go and then not think of them again the rest of my life. It would just be easier not to have any reminder of them so that the pain might fade a bit over the years while I was telling myself that they were happier without me and living a better life than I could give them.

The government seems to think that this is the best way as well, and only allows children to find out the info on their parents if the parents agree. It is a privacy issue. If you don't want someone to find out the details about you, you have the right to deny them that information.

While it might not be the right thing from the child's perspective, it is the right thing from the birth parent as they are trying to forget what they did.

Hometown Girl

I'm not sure what you mean by the government helping people adopt. The only benefit that they get from the government is a deduction on their taxes which helps with the cost of adopting. Basically the same as being able to deduct the cost of maternity and delivery care.

Adoptees whose birth mother or parents opted for a closed adoption have a right to their privacy.

My personal opinion (and I have adopted people in my family) is that the parents who gave up their child made a difficult decision that they felt would be the best for their child and themselves. They also gave a precious gift to another family. While many children grow up in their birth families never knowing for sure whether they were wanted, an adopted child should know that they were definitely wanted and loved. Their parents went through alot in order to have them as part of their family. For those who have said "get over it", I think that this is not perhaps the most sensitive way to state it, but I think that people should count their blessings and focus on the reality of the world in which they live, not think that if only things were different they might have been happier.

Karina

I think most people give a child up for adoption because they don't want further contact, that's why. If they wanted a relationship, they could let the agency know, and then there would be no legal issue. Or else they themselves would be looking for their kid.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: