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.
This response is totally uncalled for. Warren and Sheena are not keeping the adoption from their daughter. The only people who deserve a response like this are the parents who don't tell their children they were adopted to begin with, or wait until adulthood.
Did you read that Warren is, as he has been doing, insisting that we are all anti-adoption here? I'm a bit tired of that reactive and completely incorrect labeling, myself.
This response is totally uncalled for. Warren and Sheena are not keeping the adoption from their daughter. The only people who deserve a response like this are the parents who don't tell their children they were adopted to begin with, or wait until adulthood.
I have never indicated that he was keeping his daughter's status as an adoptee from her. In any comment I have made here. My response you quoted and referenced is no more uncalled for than Warren continually labeling those who don't share his exact views on adoption as "anti adoption." Which is exactly what I reacted to. All I did was point out that those who feel that there should be more truth and transparency in adoption are not "anti adoption" as he keeps accusing us of being. He is clearly not interested in adoption being any more truthful or transparent then the closed international adoption approach he chose. Closed adoptions, by their very nature, are far from being about truth and transparency for the adoptee. And Warren seems to think that anyone who does not share his preference for closed adoption practices is "anti-adoption." And I challenged his accusation, referenced his own statements on the matter and offered my thoughts.
What I did indicate in my response is that speaking for his daughter's "birth woman" when he has absolutely no idea what she might think or feel about anything is, in fact, not truthful nor transparent. I also called him on the fact that he has accused the adoptees who feel differently from him as not having good adoptive parents. I mean really, Nim. How could I not resopnd to that by inquiring if we should all assume his daughter does not have good adoptive parents if she feels differently about adoption than he does? Not sure why that is uncalled for. Or any more uncalled for than anything he has already spewed about other people around here.
Of course, he has yet to address the contradictory statements I have referenced twice. He has also not addressed my question of whether we should consider his daughter as not having good adoptive parents or "anti-adoption" if she feels that adoption should have more truth and transparency.
I'm waiting. Whenever you are ready to clarify your statements, I'll be here reading Warren.
Did you read that Warren is, as he has been doing, insisting that we are all anti-adoption here? I'm a bit tired of that reactive and completely incorrect labeling, myself.
Yes, I've been following. I am just saying that accusing either of them of being secretive is uncalled for, regardless of how much you disagree with them, because they're not being secretive with their daughter.
I have never indicated that he was keeping his daughter's status as an adoptee from her. In any comment I have made here.
No you haven't, and I'm not saying you have. If you read what I said again, I'm specifically saying that it's not fair to say she's being secretive when she's not being so.
Quote:
My response you quoted and referenced is no more uncalled for than Warren continually labeling those who don't share his exact views on adoption as "anti adoption." Which is exactly what I reacted to. All I did was point out that those who feel that there should be more truth and transparency in adoption are not "anti adoption" as he keeps accusing us of being.
I am not calling you out on all your reactions. Have your opinions. I'm just saying that (my opinion is) it's not fair to call either of them secretive.
Quote:
Closed adoptions, by their very nature, are far from being about truth and transparency for the adoptee.
Not true at all. My adoption is closed. I've searched for my biological mother. My family is open about adoption. Don't make assumptions about people just because of the kind of adoption they have.
Quote:
What I did indicate in my response is that speaking for his daughter's "birth woman" when he has absolutely no idea what she might think or feel about anything is, in fact, not truthful nor transparent.
I don't see how that's not truthful or transparent. Secrecy would be if they didn't tell their daughter she was adopted at all. That's what I was saying. I wasn't saying you accused them of actually doing that. I'm saying it would take them not mentioning the adoption at all to their daughter to qualify for the descriptor "secretive". And there posters on these boards that have done that. Save it for them, gcm.
Did you read that Warren is, as he has been doing, insisting that we are all anti-adoption here? I'm a bit tired of that reactive and completely incorrect labeling, myself.
Doesn't justify accusing them of doing something they're not doing.
Pick all the bones you want with them regarding things they'd said and done. But being secretive is not one of them. Not wanting to go out of your way to search for someone is not being secretive. It's simply not having interest.
Regardless of whether their daughter wanted to search for her biological parents or not, no matter what happened, they are obviously being very open about honest about the whole thing. They've been very open and honest about the whole process.
Sheena and I have talked at length in private and she is very open with her daughter. You might not like her or Warren's choices about the closed-adoption aspect, but being secretive is pretty much the polar opposite of what either of them are doing.
Sheena and I have talked at length in private and she is very open with her daughter. You might not like her or Warren's choices about the closed-adoption aspect, but being secretive is pretty much the polar opposite of what either of them are doing.
This is your opinion Nim. And I have mine. You seem to feel that as long as the child knows he or she is adopted, that there are no secrets. Or perhaps that because closed adoption parents like Warren and Sheena are forthcoming with what little they do know, that there are no secrets. I disagree. Closed adoption means that the truth about the adoptee's origins are purposely being kept from him or her. This is secretive. And it is my feeling that adoptive parents who actively choose closed adoption are partnering with the adoption industry to keep the adoptee's origins a secret from him or her while also giving their approval to the practices. Warren and Sheena have stated here several times that they chose closed, international adoption for the specific purpose of not wanting anything to do with the adoptee's "birth people." It is my feeling that because of this, they went into this adoption endeavor with the intent of making sure that the truth about the adoptee's origins remained closed and unavailable. A secret if you will.
To top it off, they have claimed on several occasions here that their daughter's "birth woman" wants privacy and was quite pleased to ditch her child so as to not let the pregnancy interrupt her university plans. A few us have questioned how they know this to be the truth. Because really, if the "birth woman" did not express it to them directly, they can't know for certain what the truth is. As such, it is my feeling that any closed adoption adoptive parent claiming to actually know what their adopted child's "birth woman" might think or feel post-adoption without actually communicating with her is lying. Because there is no way for them actually know the truth. And I'm getting really tired of pointing this out.
With closed adoption, adoptive parents willingly enter into an arrangement that purposefully keeps the adoptee in the dark about his or her origins on an ongoing basis. I feel this to be secretive. Others can disagree. Again, the whole point of my original post that got you riled up here was to point out that those of us who desire more truth and transparency in adoption are not anti-adoption as Warren has continually accused us of being. Based on him continually labeling us as anti-adoption, I can only assume that he considers himself to be pro-adoption. Which means that he feels being pro-adoption involves supporting the closed adoption practices that perpetuate secrets and apparently encourages lying. With his labeling and accusing, I have also quite reaonsonably concluded that he is threatened by truth and transparency in adoption. Because he likes the secrecy involved with closed adoption.
Of course, he has not come back here to address anyone's comments or challenges to his statements. So really. Whatever. He can obviously dish it out but he won't take it back. And I've had it with his labels and accusations. If he feels that he is in a position to label and accuse others as being anti-this and pro-that, then he has placed himself in a position where others can scrutinize his statements for contradictions and inconsistencies. Because this is a public forum for discussion and he is not willing to consider the views of others. He choose labels and accusations over actual discussion.
And really Nim. Warren can speak for himself. Obviously. But if you feel the need to defend his honor, cool. I'm sure he appreciates it.
Doesn't justify accusing them of doing something they're not doing.
Pick all the bones you want with them regarding things they'd said and done. But being secretive is not one of them. Not wanting to go out of your way to search for someone is not being secretive. It's simply not having interest.
Regardless of whether their daughter wanted to search for her biological parents or not, no matter what happened, they are obviously being very open about honest about the whole thing. They've been very open and honest about the whole process.
Sheena and I have talked at length in private and she is very open with her daughter. You might not like her or Warren's choices about the closed-adoption aspect, but being secretive is pretty much the polar opposite of what either of them are doing.
I have my own definitions of what "secretive" in an adoption means, and I'm equally as entitled to those opinions as Warren is to his.
Warren and Sheena have repeatedly expressed their desire to keep their birth person away from their lives. This is why they went with an international adoption, as they have admitted to multiple times. They have said they didn't want the birth woman interfering in their lives, they wanted a child who was ready to move on, and they had no interest in their child having any contact with the birth woman. To me, this is secretive in that they are actively barring their child from her biological roots. I cannot imagine, based on what they have said here, that they would be ok with her deciding to look for her birth woman. I cannot imagine that they would be ok with her forming a relationship with her birth woman and seeing her as more than simply the vessel that gave her life. To you, you may not view this as secretive. That's fine. But it's equally fine for me to say it is- you can disagree all you would like, but you cannot tell me that I'm not allowed my own opinion simply because you don't agree with it. I don't agree with Warren and Sheena on, well, pretty much anything, but they are of course entitled to their viewpoints. As am I.
This is a public forum where posters are consciously choosing to participate in discussions. Warren made statements that I don't agree with, and part of posting in a public forum is handling the responses you get. He is certainly able to simply not engage or respond (as he is doing) or to come back and further refute and hold to his position.
I have not had private discussions with Sheena or Warren. As such, i can only respond to what they have posted. That's nice that you have a further relationship with them that gives you deeper insight into their adoption philosophies, but I don't have that. Based on what I have seen them post, I don't think I would learn anything that would change my opinion that they are participating in a secretive adoption that they have chose for their own personal and selfish reasons, not for the good or benefit of their daughter.
And of a child who was not. There is nothing "false" or "deceptive" about any part of her life or our life.
My son has a REAL SISTER. She lives in her house. She is OUR DAUGHTER WHO WAS BORN OF A BIRTH WOMAN who is NOT HER MOTHER.
My HUSBAND has two children. One was born inside of me and the other was born inside of a young woman in Korea who was a college student and a part time clerk.
Next year my family will increase yet again.
My children's birth certificates are real. They contain the names of their parents.
Their REAL PARENTS.
We know that some of you think other things. I think you are misinformed.
I want to hear from others who are REAL PARENTS of adopted children or otherwise support the validity of families such as mine.
I am a REAL parent who also has two children. They are both my children...equally loved, cherished, and adored. I am their REAL mother. One was born via IVF, and I gave birth to him 14 years ago. One was adopted at birth, and is now 8 years old. They are REAL brother and sister.
However, (and I say this with the utmost respect) you cannot deny the fact that our adopted children have REAL mothers too. You also can't deny the fact that our children both have two birth certificates. Once the adoption was finalized, we received a legal updated copy with my name, and my husband's name listed as her parents. But we still have the original one listing her birth mother's name.
No, their birth mothers are NOT raising our children. However, if it wasn't for them giving birth and choosing an adoption plan, WE wouldn't be their mothers.
I used to get offended when people would ask about my daughter's "real mother." But I decided to educate them about using he correct adoption lingo. Don't get too caught up in what other people think or say.
On a final note, my daughter asked me the other day why she has blonde hair and blue eyes, and why we don't. We have brown hair and brown eyes. She wanted to know who she resembled. I told her point blank that she looks like her birth mom. My daughter said "Pfffft, no mommy, I am asking about our real family."
I thought this was very telling and quite enlightening.
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.
