Thank you to everyone who commented on my blog today. Really. I couldn't believe how many views I got, and while I certainly didn't get 200 comments to go along with the 200 views (thankfully because I'd probably be responding to them all until 2010), I did learn a little bit more of the give and take between adoptees and AP's.
I appreciate the dialogue...good, bad, indifferent...it made me think. Perhaps my brain is on overload now though because I can't form a complete thought.
Good night.
It all makes me think too - which is a good thing.
ReplyDeleteHi. It was not you. I have had several hurtful comments from anonymous bloggers. One that even implied that I had a 'blanket over my head' and another that I was 'wrong' about my opinion.
ReplyDeleteI didn't feel your comment was rude or innappropriate. Sorry if you felt my posing was directed at you. I promise you, it was not.
Yes, as an adoptee, I get told that I'm wrong for thinking adoption is not the best option and that I'm just bitter. Not fun, huh?
ReplyDeleteI received your comment on my blog and I appreciate your perspective that "adoption is not best for the child". Just to be clear, my post was meant to be informative, as November is celebrated as National Adoption Month. If you re-read my post, you'll see I did not share my opinion on adoption in any way, shape or form.
ReplyDeleteHowever, while certainly not for everyone, I personally believe that adoption can be a beautiful thing. Some children have biological parents that are drug-users and neglectful or downright abusive. In those cases, I believe a child may have a better upbringing with another family that can give them the love they deserve.
I guess we can just agree to disagree. It's what makes the world go round :)
My point is, most adoptees, and natural mothers as well, do not "celebrate" National Adoption Month. It's a time of great sorrow and brings up deep emotions of pain and loss. Adoption, while I know is wonderful for adoptive parents, is NOT necessary. I was placed with abusive adoptive parents...so please, understand that your argument that I was placed in a better home is thrown out the window.
ReplyDeleteI'm very sad to hear that you were abused by your adoptive parents. That is a tragedy that I wouldn't wish on anyone. Of course, I know many people - myself included - who grew up in abusive homes with their biological parents. I can understand why you feel the way you do but banning or outlawing adoption is not going to take away the abuse in the world. I still firmly believe that the vast majority of adoptive parents - and people in general - are not abusive or ill-meaning.
ReplyDeleteIn my earlier comment, I was referring to my cousin, who is a heroine addict and continues to get pregnant with children she doesn't want. She doesn't even attend regular doctor's visits to check on the health and well-being of the fetus. Her children have been born with drugs in their system and one of her daughters passed away in her crib due to her neglect (she was passed out on the couch and didn't hear the baby crying). Her children have been placed with another family, where they are loved and provided for. And she is still abusing drugs and has made no effort to get to know them. In this scenario, I do think adoption was a good thing for those kids. Otherwise, who knows where they would be. Maybe with their baby sister in heaven. I wish that all mothers could take responsibility for the children they create. But this is not an ideal world and sadly, for whatever reason, children are brought into the world when the parents are unable or like my cousin, unwilling to provide for them.
I'm not a regular reader of your blog so I'm not sure of the circumstances behind your adoption and why your birth parents felt they couldn't parent you. If adoption was not an option, you would not have been abused by the people who took you in. But if your mother did not have that option back then, what else could have happened to you? Sure, perhaps she could have gained the confidence and resources to raise you. But what other choice would there have been? I fear that by banning adoption, this would lead to increased abortions and I personally do not feel that abortion is a better option for the child in question.
Honestly Kristen, the adoptive "Rah Rah" rhetoric that you keep sending my way is very overdone. As for the adoption vs. abortion debate, I've copied and pasted my response on that subject to Rachel:
ReplyDeleteI’m sorry to say that I can’t/won’t answer the “Shouldn’t adoptees be grateful they weren’t aborted?” question. You, I mean that in the most general sense of the word, could have been aborted too…but I would never think to say that to you. See what I mean? It’s a moot point…and a bit disrespectful to be honest. Yes, I could have been aborted…and some days, in my darkest of hours growing up, I wished for that. The pain of feeling unwanted and unloved by everyone around me caused me to withdraw from enjoying my childhood.
I was placed in an abusive home…emotional, mental, physical, verbal, sexual…so the argument I’ve heard over and over that I was given up to have a better life doesn’t fly either. I’m told to “get over it”…and be glad I “wasn’t aborted”. It hurts…and that’s the anger and bitterness I write from.
I really don't have much else to say in response to what you wrote, except that I'd prefer that you use the term "natural" or "first" instead of "biological" or "birth".
First of all, the technical term for those who donate their DNA to you are "biological" or "birth" parents. Unless you are referring to a donor egg/sperm/surrogate scenario, in which those lines are a bit blurry. "Natural" or "first" parents? How do you determine natural vs. unnatural parenting? At what point do you consider the initial act of parenthood? Conception? Fertilization? I don't understand your preference for these terms.
ReplyDeleteJust as you feel that my "rah rah" rhetoric is overdone, I feel that your "down with adoption, woe is me" mentality is getting really old. May I remind you that you first came and posted on my blog? You were the one who felt you needed to spread your negativity and "educate" (more like lecture) me about the subject so pardon me if I feel the need to retort.
You are blinded by your own circumstances if you cannot admit that adoption may actually be a good thing for MOST people. I never said that it was a good thing for YOU. Obviously, your experiences prove otherwise. But you make these blanket statements as if you speak for all adoptees across the world. I doubt that all adoptees (international, domestic, foster, etc.) feel the same way you do. Your situation makes up just a teeny tiny fraction of all adoption experiences. For every one of you, there are thousands of others who would look back on their adoption experience with happiness. I'm sorry you happen to fall into the painful minority.
I think I have been quite respectful toward you in this moral debate. I'm sorry if bringing up abortion hit a nerve with you. I never stated you should be "grateful you weren't aborted". I honestly want to know your opinion. If you feel adoption is "unnecessary", if a mother gets pregnant with a child she doesn't want, in your ideal world, what options would she have? Because the way I see it, if you remove adoption as an option, she could either raise the baby herself or have an abortion. If she really honestly does not want the baby, that leaves only one option.
Perhaps you would think the world would be better off by banning legal adoption. I see a world without legal adoption in a different way. I see black market adoptions running rampant with no qualifying or screening process for adoptive parents. I see newborn babies left in alleys, on doorsteps or in dumpsters. And I see even busier abortion clinics. None of that describes an ideal world to me.
And FWIW, I think I would respond better to what you have to say if you wrote it from a perspective of "this is my story, and I want to share it with you" rather than "so help you God if you have a different opinion than me".
Kristen,
ReplyDeleteI know that I had commented on your blog that I was done, but I need to respond to this comment you'd left...
In my mind, it is NOT natural for a child to be separated from his/her parents. Therefore, I do prefer to refer to my mother as my natural mother. And DNA is not "donated"..it just exists.
I'm not sure you truly understand that there are more adoptees than you care to recognize that feel the EXACT same way as I do about adoption and the fact that it tears families apart. Even my friends who are adoptees who were brought up in "good" households and had great adoptive parents feel that that strong sense of loss.
I know that it's your belief that adoption helps all those involved, but that's just.not.true. It helps infertile couples adopt children, most often from other countries but the children are then growing up far from home, with a strange language and strange people who they don't know. Many times the children don't attach to the parents for several months. It helps the adoption agencies and lawyers make money, but causes the children when they grow up to wonder how there could be a price tag for their lives. It does NOT help the adoptee or the natural mother because they are separated. Plain and simple.
I understand that you are pro-life...I get it. And I'm not telling you to change your view on that...but an ideal world is also not one where children are growing up with strangers..without their original birth certificates or their natural families.
I see a world where natural mothers are given support...and let to know that there are programs designed to help them to care for their children. That yes, it'll be hard to, but the long term affects for her and for the children are even harder. I see a world where adoption websites don't target women and coerce them into giving their babies up so another woman can raise them.
I think I would have responded better to you if you weren't trying to make me feel grateful for being adopted.
Why should I have to write from a different perspective? This is me, take me or leave me...you wouldn't be the first to either take or leave.