Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. And in particular those who have very little contact with eastern Europeans orphaned children.
Hilariously incorrect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rohirette
Now, Sheena made a statement that older kids coming here from other countries aren't attached to their names, and it is just American adults who find it disturbing. If this is literally true, at least dealing with the Eastern European countries, then it does change things somewhat. I still question what affect it could have on the eventual adult, even if an eager to please child who was happy to have a safe home did not object. But at least it isn't taking something from someone who wants to hold on to it.
Sheena has some absurd ideas about Eastern Europe, her "Eastern European heritage" aside.
We are both partially of Eastern European Heritage. As a family we have Belorussian, Russian, Ukrainian and Polish heritage.
I do not appreciate being called selfish at all. However, I am not only adopting to "rescue a child" we are adopting because we want a larger family.
You have every right when and if you adopt to do as you see fit when you have adopted if you ever adopt.
I wish you would. So many people AVOID Eastern European adoptions because of terrible stories in the press and the fact that even in Russia, the children are not as young as those available from Asian countries and Guatemala.
I would encourage you to adopt and to name the child an appropriate name.
You seem to be saying that it is immature for a parent to bestow a name upon a child that he or she elected to parent. I think that is an odd belief but it's your prerogative.
I think in the total scheme of things, a name change ranks incredibly low when rating the problems that beset the social orphans of Eastern Europe.
Yet another post beleaguering the point that children are possessions and that the rights of the parent trump the rights of children.
I don't think you are immature, I think you are selfish in refusing to allow someone who ALREADY HAS A NAME to have a say in whether or not they keep it. Adopting is not the exact same thing as being a birth parent, if it were we would not call it by a different name. It has its own UNIQUE challenges and UNIQUE joys. And stating over and over again that all parents have the RIGHT to name their children ignores the reality of adoption. One of those unique adoption responsibilities (especially that of older children) is to acknowledge the FACT that these are people who already have personalities, experiences, and attachments including NAMES. Ignoring that responsibility is incredible to me.
Morally, adoptive parents have different, and possibly more responsibilities than birth parents. It isn't fair but OTOH adoption is a choice. Choosing to run roughshod all over the potential wants and needs of an older child just so you get to have every parenting experience YOU WANT is what I am critical of and what is making me re-think my entire stance on adoption.
Adoptees have no safety net in place to ensure that adoptive parents (the majority of which are lovely people) put their needs first in those situations unique to adoption alone. That is a shame.
Sheena, what if your parents had divorced and remarried and you ended up living with your father and new stepmother, would you have been happy abou tthem changing your name? They wouldn't even think of doing it.
Also, think about it the other way, what if you were a child being adopted by a Ukraine couple and they didn't like the name Sheena and wanted to name you something like Olga or something like that, would you be happy about that.
Whatever you plan to do, I am assuming that you will let the children know upfront that it is a condition of their adoption that you allow them to change their names rather than spring it on them once they are adopted. They can then decide whether they still wish to be adopted by you.
Whether I was attached to my name or not, I think I'd personally feel a bit odd if the people who were hosting me said they would adopt me and attached conditions to the adoption, eg "Olga, we'd love to adopt you but only on the condition that we can change your name". "But what if I don't want to change it". "Well, we won't be adopting you then". I personally would just say "OK, I don't want to be adopted by someone whom has placed a condition on my adoption" even if I disliked my name - it is the principle of the matter.
Also, even though the biological family may no longer be in the children's life physically, they may be still there psychologically. I was just wondering how you would deal with that.
Quote:
Adoption for an older child, DOES involve some letting go of the past and the ability to accept something new.
Note you also say "some", well they are already going to be doing "some" of that without having their names changed. However, they should be able to decide what they wish to let go of and what they don't wish to let go of.
Sheena, what if your parents had divorced and remarried and you ended up living with your father and new stepmother, would you have been happy abou tthem changing your name? They wouldn't even think of doing it.
Also, think about it the other way, what if you were a child being adopted by a Ukraine couple and they didn't like the name Sheena and wanted to name you something like Olga or something like that, would you be happy about that.
Whatever you plan to do, I am assuming that you will let the children know upfront that it is a condition of their adoption that you allow them to change their names rather than spring it on them once they are adopted. They can then decide whether they still wish to be adopted by you.
Whether I was attached to my name or not, I think I'd personally feel a bit odd if the people who were hosting me said they would adopt me and attached conditions to the adoption, eg "Olga, we'd love to adopt you but only on the condition that we can change your name". "But what if I don't want to change it". "Well, we won't be adopting you then". I personally would just say "OK, I don't want to be adopted by someone whom has placed a condition on my adoption" even if I disliked my name - it is the principle of the matter.
Also, even though the biological family may no longer be in the children's life physically, they may be still there psychologically. I was just wondering how you would deal with that.
Note you also say "some", well they are already going to be doing "some" of that without having their names changed. However, they should be able to decide what they wish to let go of and what they don't wish to let go of.
Well I have a step mother. She is of the "wicked" variety. Had she taken my siblings and me as her own and allowed us to call her "mom" - she could certainly change my name.
She didn't care enough though. She could only love her "flesh and blood". Taken a new name so that she was not constantly reminded of our mother? Ummm...in a heart beat.
Well I have a step mother. She is of the "wicked" variety. Had she taken my siblings and me as her own and allowed us to call her "mom" - she could certainly change my name.
She didn't care enough though. She could only love her "flesh and blood". Taken a new name so that she was not constantly reminded of our mother? Ummm...in a heart beat.
We weren't important enough for her attention.
And this is, undoubtedly, the root cause of your singled-minded determination to change the names of these children.
But they're not you, and your experience isn't theirs. You can love them and make them a part of your family without forcing them to give up their identities. I wish you could see that.
Well I have a step mother. She is of the "wicked" variety. Had she taken my siblings and me as her own and allowed us to call her "mom" - she could certainly change my name.
She didn't care enough though. She could only love her "flesh and blood". Taken a new name so that she was not constantly reminded of our mother? Ummm...in a heart beat.
We weren't important enough for her attention.
I think it is important to remember that you are not your step mother, and the children you will be fostering are not you or your siblings. My intention isn't to tell you what to do, but just to remind you that you can show them love, no matter what you call them. And it's obvious you don't care about flesh and blood, so I know you will love them just the same.
Yet another post beleaguering the point that children are possessions and that the rights of the parent trump the rights of children.
I don't think you are immature, I think you are selfish in refusing to allow someone who ALREADY HAS A NAME to have a say in whether or not they keep it. Adopting is not the exact same thing as being a birth parent, if it were we would not call it by a different name. It has its own UNIQUE challenges and UNIQUE joys. And stating over and over again that all parents have the RIGHT to name their children ignores the reality of adoption. One of those unique adoption responsibilities (especially that of older children) is to acknowledge the FACT that these are people who already have personalities, experiences, and attachments including NAMES. Ignoring that responsibility is incredible to me.
Morally, adoptive parents have different, and possibly more responsibilities than birth parents. It isn't fair but OTOH adoption is a choice. Choosing to run roughshod all over the potential wants and needs of an older child just so you get to have every parenting experience YOU WANT is what I am critical of and what is making me re-think my entire stance on adoption.
Adoptees have no safety net in place to ensure that adoptive parents (the majority of which are lovely people) put their needs first in those situations unique to adoption alone. That is a shame.
Our daughter came over from Korea at age 4 months- What experience, personality, experience and attachment to name does she have. She never ever wanted to find her birth mother nor does she ever want to visit her country. You cannot put your beliefs on other people. Our daughter is 16 1/2 years old, old enough to make her own mind up. She hated her birth name and was very happy that my wife gave her a beautiful name.
Yet another post beleaguering the point that children are possessions and that the rights of the parent trump the rights of children.
I don't think you are immature, I think you are selfish in refusing to allow someone who ALREADY HAS A NAME to have a say in whether or not they keep it. Adopting is not the exact same thing as being a birth parent, if it were we would not call it by a different name. It has its own UNIQUE challenges and UNIQUE joys. And stating over and over again that all parents have the RIGHT to name their children ignores the reality of adoption. One of those unique adoption responsibilities (especially that of older children) is to acknowledge the FACT that these are people who already have personalities, experiences, and attachments including NAMES. Ignoring that responsibility is incredible to me.
Morally, adoptive parents have different, and possibly more responsibilities than birth parents. It isn't fair but OTOH adoption is a choice. Choosing to run roughshod all over the potential wants and needs of an older child just so you get to have every parenting experience YOU WANT is what I am critical of and what is making me re-think my entire stance on adoption.
Adoptees have no safety net in place to ensure that adoptive parents (the majority of which are lovely people) put their needs first in those situations unique to adoption alone. That is a shame.
This is exactly right and why I speak out for adoptees. Adoption and birthing children are NOT The same and should be treated differently. Adopted children come with a history, a first family, a heritage that may be different, a different set of genetics and a name. They are not blank slates that you can imprint as you please. This is why I said that adoption should be the very last resort and not a way to build a middle class family. This is not a matter of "semantics", it's how some people perpetuate this damaging view.
And this is, undoubtedly, the root cause of your singled-minded determination to change the names of these children.
But they're not you, and your experience isn't theirs. You can love them and make them a part of your family without forcing them to give up their identities. I wish you could see that.
Nope. That would be my desire to do what we think is best for our children. I do not care about flesh and blood. GOT THAT?
I have said it like a million times. Like any parents we want to have the joy of naming our children.
This is exactly right and why I speak out for adoptees. Adoption and birthing children are NOT The same and should be treated differently. Adopted children come with a history, a first family, a heritage that may be different, a different set of genetics and a name. They are not blank slates that you can imprint as you please. This is why I said that adoption should be the very last resort and not a way to build a middle class family. This is not a matter of "semantics", it's how some people perpetuate this damaging view.
Please do not speak for all children who were adopted. Speak for yourself.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
