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.
My woman who birthed my daughter was a teenager and a student. She wanted to finish school and not to marry her boyfriend. That was a win win situation.
I'm not saying she actually was on crack cocaine. I guess the hypothetical in my statement, "even if" was missed by many. But I do know she was an alcoholic and was involved in crime. I don't judge her cause I think her own childhood and circumstances led to that, but in any case, I am glad for the alternative life I am living now as a result of having been adopted. My mother was 16 and also in some other very difficult circumstances that would have made it impossible for her to raise me. I don't blame her for a second for putting me up for adoption, in fact, I am profoundly grateful. Also a win win situation, IMO.
"But yeah, I really don't feel the need to completely search out my biological mother or father."
Seems that you do know some things about your past and that you either looked into it or someone gave you the information. It was also good you spent time in your country. Maybe the information and exposure was able to give you some peace regarding your past and identity. I think when adoptees aren't able to find the information they seek or that part of their identity is denied, it can create problems. That was my point. I would say you are very lucky to have this inner peace. I know this is not so for a lot of adoptees.
"But yeah, I really don't feel the need to completely search out my biological mother or father."
Seems that you do know some things about your past and that you either looked into it or someone gave you the information. It was also good you spent time in your country. Maybe the information and exposure was able to give you some peace regarding your past and identity. I think when adoptees aren't able to find the information they seek or that part of their identity is denied, it can create problems. That was my point. I would say you are very lucky to have this inner peace. I know this is not so for a lot of adoptees.
What I mean is I don't need to meet both of them and create a long-standing relationship with them. Sure I'd like to maybe meet my biological mother once, but I don't feel the need like some adoptees to stay in touch and be facebook friends and send biannual photos or whatever. That said I wouldn't say I have achieved inner peace either. I have a lot of memories of the orphanage that are very vague and hard to explain, especially since I have zero visual memory of what was happening, so they are very unsettling to me. I don't think it's fair to assume that people who have found some answers are at peace and that people who haven't are not at peace. Some are at peace without knowing anything, and some are still not at peace once they found out everything. Being at peace is a very personally-defined state of being, IMO.
What I mean is I don't need to meet both of them and create a long-standing relationship with them. Sure I'd like to maybe meet my biological mother once, but I don't feel the need like some adoptees to stay in touch and be facebook friends and send biannual photos or whatever. That said I wouldn't say I have achieved inner peace either. I have a lot of memories of the orphanage that are very vague and hard to explain, especially since I have zero visual memory of what was happening, so they are very unsettling to me. I don't think it's fair to assume that people who have found some answers are at peace and that people who haven't are not at peace. Some are at peace without knowing anything, and some are still not at peace once they found out everything. Being at peace is a very personally-defined state of being, IMO.
I don't know about anyone else but I know a lot of adoptees, myself included, can often end up feeling rather paradoxical feelings in that they often do feel more at peace in many ways by knowing more about things but also can end up feeling neither here nor there - yet not ever wanting to go back to not knowing.
What I mean is I don't need to meet both of them and create a long-standing relationship with them. Sure I'd like to maybe meet my biological mother once, but I don't feel the need like some adoptees to stay in touch and be facebook friends and send biannual photos or whatever. That said I wouldn't say I have achieved inner peace either. I have a lot of memories of the orphanage that are very vague and hard to explain, especially since I have zero visual memory of what was happening, so they are very unsettling to me. I don't think it's fair to assume that people who have found some answers are at peace and that people who haven't are not at peace. Some are at peace without knowing anything, and some are still not at peace once they found out everything. Being at peace is a very personally-defined state of being, IMO.
I know where you are coming from...I have these as well. My "memories" are more sound, smell related than visual. Thank you for explaining. Achieving inner peace is difficult and I am personally still seraching for answers. I don't know if I will get the peace I am looking for with some or all answers, but for me, I do think knowing will be better than wondering.
I prefer you not use abbreviations. I find the term "PAP" to be rather offensive based on my experiences posting in some other adoption forums over the years. I think one should say the full term "prospective adoptive parent". "AP" is not one I particularly favor either. I've seen some put an "e" on the end as a form of ridicule of adoptive parents.
With respect to some of your other points, its impossible to read all the materials you put down in a short amount of time. I did read some of them and I will make a few comments.
1. The literature on the situation in Vietnam was pretty awful. Something had to be done and it was done. The USA stopped adoptions from that country.
2. How many of these articles are written pre-Hague Convention--or pre-implementation of the Treaty? If you don't acknowledge this treaty has significantly changed the international adoption situation you'd simply be wrong. The Hague Convention has greatly restricted international adoption and the abuses many of these articles refer too.
3. There's a supposition in your opinion and that is built into all these articles. That supposition is that the worst thing that could happen to a child is to be adopted via an "unethical adoption placement". I just disagree here and I think many others do. The worst thing that could happen to a child is to be raised in a country in an orphanage with little in the way of resources. Some of these countries have very high death rates for children ages 0-10 because there is very little in the way of medical care. That leaves out issues like ongoing guerrilla warfare, malnutrition, and non-existent public health facilities in much of the Third World. Not all the Third World countries are in this situation, but far too many are.
4. I distinguish "unethical situations" in the following way. Certainly, no one should allow a situation where children are literally being kidnapped to meet the needs of adoption. However, I don't necessarily regard it as problematic when poor mothers in these countries choose to place a child for adoption when they receive gifts of money and other commodities for doing so. Many people in our country are oblivious to high degree of poverty and deprivation in the developing world. This may well be a reasonable choice for a poor mother to make under the circumstances. I'm sure this will meet with controversy among some. However, we didn't create these conditions of poverty. They've just always existed.
5. These conditions of deprivation and poverty are not going to end anytime soon. They may not end in our lifetimes. In the meantime, there will be plenty of suffering children and poor mothers. Even if we had the resources to help all these people, the American taxpayer is never going to stand for it. He feels overtaxed and he worries too much about losing his social security and medicare benefits because those programs aren't adequately funded.
I'm sure your heart is in the right place. But bringing a virtual end to adoption isn't going to make the lives of poor women and children in developing nations any better. You may argue that "bringing a virtual end to adoption" is not what you are seeking. I will just say its clear from the diminished numbers of international adoptions that that is the direction we are moving in. Its just going to remove one more escape for a few people. I'm confident there are at least some women in these countries who place their children for adoption simply because they want a life for them that is not one of hopeless, grinding poverty.
A final consideration is that perhaps placing a few of these children for adoption stimulates awareness and understanding in the United States and Europe of countries like Ethiopia and China. The children peek our curiosity and it causes some to learn more about those countries. The adoption process may result in some valuable contacts between our nation and those countries. The more we are aware of those countries and their problems, the more we are likely to want to give our money and help them. Lack of contact and ignorance does not bring people close together and it does not create empathy.
But your mindset is responsible for those conditions of poverty.
Read: The Shock Doctrine, and The Liberal Virus, and Empire of Capital.
I am getting back to this busy thread belatedly. Several of you have asked me questions about my connection to adoption. I am not adopted, nor am I an adoptive parent, but I have five family members who were adopted, three domestically in infancy, two internationally at the ages of seven and nine. I am also an advocate (not an employee!) for Reece's Rainbow Down Syndrome International Adoption Ministry, support Bible Orphan Ministry (based in Ukraine, BOM supports orphanages and institutions with donations of clothing, bedding, games, toys, educational materials, and also assists teens who have aged out of the orphanage system. It was founded and is operated by Ukrainians who are "graduates" of the orphanage system there), and have and will represent Reece's Rainbow at my local Buddy Walk in the past and again next month. My young relatives who joined us via adoption from eastern Europe were not adopted through the auspices of Reece's Rainbow (which is not an adoption agency), but would have qualified to have been listed with Reece's Rainbow, as the elder child has mild CP, they were "older", and were biological siblings. Their parents' adoption journey and their past history prior to adoption led to my interest in this topic, and once informed, it became a matter of conscience to help.
My primary interest and knowledge is of the orphanages and institutions of Eastern Europe, particularly those countries which were once part of the former Soviet Union or part of the Soviet Bloc. Here, people with special needs were viewed as of no use to The State, hence of no value at all as human beings, and the general belief is that children with developmental delays of all kinds are unable to learn anything, much less be educated.
Parents of newborns with Down syndrome or other identifiable special needs were urged to give up their babies at birth, to be raised in orphanages. At age four, children leave the baby house orphanages - for typical kids, the next stop is a detsky dom, or children's home. But for children with special needs, the next stop -and often the permanent stop - is usually an adult-level mental institution, where many such children die within the first two years. Reece's Rainbow advocates for such children by encouraging their adoption. Reece's Rainbow also has begun a program within Ukraine to encourage birth parents of children with Down syndrome to keep their children.
Complicating such matters is the lack of accessibility for people with mobility issues in most of Eastern Europe. Elevators in the typical Soviet-era high rises in which much of the metropolitan population resides do not accommodate wheelchairs. Simple things like ramps and curb cuts are rare. Special education is non-existent, physical, occupational and speech therapies are rare. Medical care is not up to western standards.
In addition, the rate of alcohol abuse and AIDS is staggering, which leads to abuse, poverty, and abandoned or neglected children with FAS and FAE and those who are HIV-positivite. HIV can be readily treated with a simple regimen of oral medication twice a day - but parents who have AIDS often do not receive proper medical care and live shortened lives, leaving minor children behind. It would be ideal if loving extended family members could care for all of these children, but in many cases, poverty and extended family dysfunction make this impossible, or there are no such relatives. Drug addiction, unemployment and homelessness contribute to the orphan crisis, and its not uncommon for custody of children from abusive families to be removed from their biological parents, just as happens in the U.S. We place such children in foster care; in Eastern Europe, it's the orphanage system.
If a no one in a family of origin is unable to care adequately and lovingly for its children, it would be best if those children were adopted by a family which IS able to care for and love them. Ideally, such an adoptive family would share the children's nationality and location. Realistically, in much of the developing world, adoption, especially adoption of children with special needs and/or children from dysfunctional families of origin or "older" children is unheard of and regarded very, very negatively. It is a rare family, indeed, who is brave enough to withstand the long-established views of the society in which they live in order to adopt a child with special needs, a child who is HIV positive, an older child, or a sibling group. For these children, their best hope is adoption by a family who resides in another country with the resources - both family and societal - which are capable of providing the care they need.
It's likely most of us posting here who are aware of the issues in the developing world which lead to the orphan crisis deplore such conditions, and would be happy to see them alieviated, so that stable families would result, with children of all descriptions remaining in loving, productive homes with their biological parents. But realistically - that's not the case. And there is little which we as individuals can do to change those societies and governments, other than to encourage education and help support families abroad, support other governments' efforts to improve care and modify old views, etc.
All this is well, and good, and commendable. But it's slow, and as I wrote previously, children don't remain children very long. They need families now. Good, stable, loving, caring families who can provide for them adequately. Far too many children have no such families - of any description - and never will. Societal change happens slowly, slowly, at a snail's pace, far too often. Attitudes change even more slowly.
But meanwhile, the children wait. And too often, die.
So this is why I advocate, and spread the word, and help however I can. It makes a difference, a huge difference.
Just ask little Katie M., who came home from Bulgaria weighing eleven pounds at age nine. Ask young Aaron N., who was sent to an isolated adult level mental institution at age four because he has arthrogryposis. Ask any of the children and families who've found one another through ministries like Reece's Rainbow. You can find them at your local Buddy Walk, likely to be coming up soon on a fall Saturday and sponsored by your local Down Syndrome Association. Stop by the Reece's Rainbow booth with the other exhibitors while you're there, and feel free to ask and learn. We'll be happy to see you.
Craig, of course all children should have access to loving families/homes/resources & they should not be left to suffer. The point is that all other options should be prioritized & exhausted before adoption abroad is even considered. I think we agree on this, so I'm not sure there is even an argument here.
However,
Some of the most common reasons for adopting abroad is because prospective adoptive parents want access to younger children or babies quicker than they would through domestic adoptions, &/or they prefer little to no chance of reunion for the child. Especially when there is so much money involved, these are the sorts of adoptions that are prime for corruption, yet these are the adoptions most often sought after. Do you see a problem with this?
I am getting back to this busy thread belatedly. Several of you have asked me questions about my connection to adoption. I am not adopted, nor am I an adoptive parent, but I have five family members who were adopted, three domestically in infancy, two internationally at the ages of seven and nine. I am also an advocate (not an employee!) for Reece's Rainbow Down Syndrome International Adoption Ministry, support Bible Orphan Ministry (based in Ukraine, BOM supports orphanages and institutions with donations of clothing, bedding, games, toys, educational materials, and also assists teens who have aged out of the orphanage system. It was founded and is operated by Ukrainians who are "graduates" of the orphanage system there), and have and will represent Reece's Rainbow at my local Buddy Walk in the past and again next month. My young relatives who joined us via adoption from eastern Europe were not adopted through the auspices of Reece's Rainbow (which is not an adoption agency), but would have qualified to have been listed with Reece's Rainbow, as the elder child has mild CP, they were "older", and were biological siblings. Their parents' adoption journey and their past history prior to adoption led to my interest in this topic, and once informed, it became a matter of conscience to help.
My primary interest and knowledge is of the orphanages and institutions of Eastern Europe, particularly those countries which were once part of the former Soviet Union or part of the Soviet Bloc. Here, people with special needs were viewed as of no use to The State, hence of no value at all as human beings, and the general belief is that children with developmental delays of all kinds are unable to learn anything, much less be educated.
Parents of newborns with Down syndrome or other identifiable special needs were urged to give up their babies at birth, to be raised in orphanages. At age four, children leave the baby house orphanages - for typical kids, the next stop is a detsky dom, or children's home. But for children with special needs, the next stop -and often the permanent stop - is usually an adult-level mental institution, where many such children die within the first two years. Reece's Rainbow advocates for such children by encouraging their adoption. Reece's Rainbow also has begun a program within Ukraine to encourage birth parents of children with Down syndrome to keep their children.
Complicating such matters is the lack of accessibility for people with mobility issues in most of Eastern Europe. Elevators in the typical Soviet-era high rises in which much of the metropolitan population resides do not accommodate wheelchairs. Simple things like ramps and curb cuts are rare. Special education is non-existent, physical, occupational and speech therapies are rare. Medical care is not up to western standards.
In addition, the rate of alcohol abuse and AIDS is staggering, which leads to abuse, poverty, and abandoned or neglected children with FAS and FAE and those who are HIV-positivite. HIV can be readily treated with a simple regimen of oral medication twice a day - but parents who have AIDS often do not receive proper medical care and live shortened lives, leaving minor children behind. It would be ideal if loving extended family members could care for all of these children, but in many cases, poverty and extended family dysfunction make this impossible, or there are no such relatives. Drug addiction, unemployment and homelessness contribute to the orphan crisis, and its not uncommon for custody of children from abusive families to be removed from their biological parents, just as happens in the U.S. We place such children in foster care; in Eastern Europe, it's the orphanage system.
If a no one in a family of origin is unable to care adequately and lovingly for its children, it would be best if those children were adopted by a family which IS able to care for and love them. Ideally, such an adoptive family would share the children's nationality and location. Realistically, in much of the developing world, adoption, especially adoption of children with special needs and/or children from dysfunctional families of origin or "older" children is unheard of and regarded very, very negatively. It is a rare family, indeed, who is brave enough to withstand the long-established views of the society in which they live in order to adopt a child with special needs, a child who is HIV positive, an older child, or a sibling group. For these children, their best hope is adoption by a family who resides in another country with the resources - both family and societal - which are capable of providing the care they need.
It's likely most of us posting here who are aware of the issues in the developing world which lead to the orphan crisis deplore such conditions, and would be happy to see them alieviated, so that stable families would result, with children of all descriptions remaining in loving, productive homes with their biological parents. But realistically - that's not the case. And there is little which we as individuals can do to change those societies and governments, other than to encourage education and help support families abroad, support other governments' efforts to improve care and modify old views, etc.
All this is well, and good, and commendable. But it's slow, and as I wrote previously, children don't remain children very long. They need families now. Good, stable, loving, caring families who can provide for them adequately. Far too many children have no such families - of any description - and never will. Societal change happens slowly, slowly, at a snail's pace, far too often. Attitudes change even more slowly.
But meanwhile, the children wait. And too often, die.
So this is why I advocate, and spread the word, and help however I can. It makes a difference, a huge difference.
Just ask little Katie M., who came home from Bulgaria weighing eleven pounds at age nine. Ask young Aaron N., who was sent to an isolated adult level mental institution at age four because he has arthrogryposis. Ask any of the children and families who've found one another through ministries like Reece's Rainbow. You can find them at your local Buddy Walk, likely to be coming up soon on a fall Saturday and sponsored by your local Down Syndrome Association. Stop by the Reece's Rainbow booth with the other exhibitors while you're there, and feel free to ask and learn. We'll be happy to see you.
This is why people advocate for change. Change doesn't just happen. It has to be explained over and over again and be heard. This is what some of us on this board are trying to do. Currently, it's not the "popular" view. Some adopting parents are thinking they are "rescuing" these children. It is my opinion that views need to be changed. The support should be to change the societal views and encourage/support parents to keep their children. It's sad to think that parents are giving up children because of what society thinks! This happens here too, young single mothers are told that it would be "better" if their child was raised by a middle class family of 2 parents. They are told it's the "unselfish" thing to do. Thankfully, this view is changing and has been changing but more work is needed. My hope is that adoption will become the very very last resort and not seen as a way to rescue poor children or a way for the middle class and wealthy to create their "dream family". To me, adoption in some circumstances is a band aid approach for a huge gaping wound.
My hope is that adoption will become the very very last resort and not seen as a way to rescue poor children or a way for the middle class and wealthy to create their "dream family". To me, adoption in some circumstances is a band aid approach for a huge gaping wound.
This... As of today adoption is being packaged as a win/win scenario that is "just another way to create a beautiful family!" & while there are many loving & beautiful adoptive families, oversimplifying adoption in such a way is problematic on many different levels.
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.
