U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Parenting > Adoption
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-09-2013, 03:16 PM
 
1,097 posts, read 1,727,792 times
Reputation: 1590

Advertisements

meh - thought it was and interesting question. I have thick skin - or wouldn't post on public forums so despite the original questioner leaving

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaded View Post
How do you feel about "fluffy words" such as first mother or first family when these individuals may have never been in the child's life? How do you feel about words like "constellation"?

At least with "forever families" the child knows that its "first family" was not forever, hence, they now have one that is.

BTW, I LOVE "entrustment." Is there a way for me to get a hold of this attorney to endorse this new word?
Personally can't stand 'fluffy words'. Fluffy words seem to exist simply to mask a reality that someone doesn't want to deal with. Spoon full of sugar and all that.

Birth mother, first family, biological family etc are all fact based terms. As is triad - just means 3; 3 entities involved. It does not qualify participation. For each member of the 3 parties who were necessary for the adoption to occur, their relationship changes over time depending on the type of adoption. A triad existed at 'the adoption'. All of them were 'in the child's life" at some point. Each piece exists before, during, and after; it but not all interact equally at all times. Any enhanced meaning people personally impose on terms like mother, parent, triads etc is their own personal issue. Language exists to communicate ideas. If some chose to use terms in ways that make them less understood to the general audience, then there is misunderstanding and pushback. But they are free to do so.

'Forever family' as promoted by the adoption industry just smacks of cutsy fairy tales with undertones of religiosity to me. It seems more like a wish term - if you repeat it often enough you make it true. Plus a term that is used as often in pet adoption as in the adoption of children is offensive to me.

I don't think AP's would really go for 'entrustment'. When something is entrusted to you, it is recognized it belonged to someone else. It may not be yours to keep. It is in trust. Exactly why is it we need another term? not clear on that one . . . seems more applicable to fostering.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-18-2013, 05:00 PM
 
Location: Kansas
19,187 posts, read 14,953,306 times
Reputation: 18248
The woman that gave birth to our son and the man that impregnated her are not a part of anything that we are a part of. I do think of them because I keep track of where they are to make sure our paths don't cross again. The woman that gave birth to our son and the man that impregnated her violated the adoption decree previously. The woman that gave birth to our son and voluntarily gave him up lost custody of the child she gave birth to 10 months later.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-23-2013, 02:32 PM
 
Location: Warren, OH
2,748 posts, read 3,324,315 times
Reputation: 6467
To me the "First Family" refers to the Obamas. Family are those who raise you, name, you, don't abuse you, and love you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-23-2013, 02:35 PM
 
Location: Warren, OH
2,748 posts, read 3,324,315 times
Reputation: 6467
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaded View Post
Nicely stated. This is also how I view birth parents. Once the relinquishement occurs, the triad dissolves and there is no need to "deny" anyone's existence or significance, rather, their roles change and the adopted child's adoptive mother and father become his parents.
Ho I see it too, Jaded.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-23-2013, 03:03 PM
 
509 posts, read 483,055 times
Reputation: 747
Quote:
Originally Posted by warren zee View Post
To me the "First Family" refers to the Obamas. Family are those who raise you, name, you, don't abuse you, and love you.
Not every child is removed from an abusive situation. In open adoptions, most cases, these are children who were relinquished at birth for varying reasons. Love is also not limited to APs. First families are capable of love, too. In fact, isn't that one thing adoption agencies say- "if you love your child, you would want what is best for them?" Also, many first moms do name their child but the name is changed.

I don't see the point limiting love.

I prefer first mom over your choice of birth person. I am ok with birth mom but it does not work for my family. Our daughters other parents are in her life, and they are more than birth parents to her and us. Just our situation. There was no abuse, no lack of love, and no reason to view them with such callous disregard and disrespect.

Last edited by tiffjoy; 02-23-2013 at 03:30 PM.. Reason: For some reason my last sentences were deleted.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-23-2013, 06:40 PM
 
Location: Warren, OH
2,748 posts, read 3,324,315 times
Reputation: 6467
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnywhereElse View Post
The woman that gave birth to our son and the man that impregnated her are not a part of anything that we are a part of. I do think of them because I keep track of where they are to make sure our paths don't cross again. The woman that gave birth to our son and the man that impregnated her violated the adoption decree previously. The woman that gave birth to our son and voluntarily gave him up lost custody of the child she gave birth to 10 months later.
I understand how you feel. If I were in your place I'd be keeping track of them also.
I also refer to her as "the woman who gave birth to our daughter". We've had no issue with her, but she has had no input into our daughter's life and she decided to relinquish her which I think was the best thing under the circumstances. - Unmarried teenager and student.

How did they violate the adoption decree?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-23-2013, 10:10 PM
 
30 posts, read 43,391 times
Reputation: 73
Wow - some of you are really down on the birth mothers, and perhaps with good reason. Truth is, many have made the hardest sacrifice a woman can out of greater unselfish love for their child. Not all BM's are young women having indiscriminate sex and making stupid choices. In fact, a woman may choose adoption if she is older and doesn't feel she can be there for the child. Or health reasons, or financial, or extenuating circumstances with the father (rape, abandonment, abuse, etc.), and the list goes on.

That said, it's your choice whether you participate open or closed adoption. There are positives to both, and a BM needn't necessarily be a can of worms. In fact, in the right situation, she can be a blessing to the family (consider the situation of surrogacy, for example). Of course, you take your chances opening yourself up to her.

At any rate, I cannot fathom how it could possibly do anything but provide a good example to your adopted child to say a prayer for his/her birth parents. It might warm your child's heart someday to remember your inclusive and loving example, especially on the holidays. Some of these people might need the love and prayer more than you. And one way or another, don't forget that especially the BM has already given you the most beautiful gift anyone can.

Last edited by MegOrMargaret; 02-23-2013 at 10:22 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2013, 01:17 AM
 
1,879 posts, read 1,856,092 times
Reputation: 1462
In regards to my own aparents, I have no idea how often they thought about my and my siblings bparents when we were young. They would have thought about them when they were thinking about how to approach telling us about them. In regards to myself, whatever they may have personally felt about my bmother, they never spoke about her in a judgmental way.

Now that I am an adult, I couldn't care less if my aparents thought about my bparents or not after I'd become of age. They are my relatives, not my aparents' relatives. However, it is my choice as an adult to have a relationship with my bfamily and my afamily have to respect that - which fortunately they do.

In the end though, I am an adult and if my aparents had tried to tell me that I was betraying them or letting them down, I would just pat them on the shoulder and say "I love you mum and dad but get over it - my wanting to know family isn't a personal attack on you". If they still couldn't get over it, then that is their problem not mine. Luckily, my amom wasn't like that. Btw that doesn't mean one should ride slipshod over their aparents feelings, I am very considerate of my amom's feelings.

I have to admit, I don't understand why any aparents would really care if their adult children wanted to have a relationship with their biological family. If there was danger involved, one could understand. However, in my case, my bfamily like many other bfamilies isn't in the least bit dangerous so why wouldn't one be happy for their child if they did end up having a good relationship with both their bfamily and their afamily? My amom is happy for me and it hasn't affected our relationship, so why do people feel threatened by reuniting adoptees?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2013, 08:43 AM
 
297 posts, read 417,604 times
Reputation: 377
Quote:
Originally Posted by susankate View Post
In regards to my own aparents, I have no idea how often they thought about my and my siblings bparents when we were young. They would have thought about them when they were thinking about how to approach telling us about them. In regards to myself, whatever they may have personally felt about my bmother, they never spoke about her in a judgmental way.

Now that I am an adult, I couldn't care less if my aparents thought about my bparents or not after I'd become of age. They are my relatives, not my aparents' relatives. However, it is my choice as an adult to have a relationship with my bfamily and my afamily have to respect that - which fortunately they do.

In the end though, I am an adult and if my aparents had tried to tell me that I was betraying them or letting them down, I would just pat them on the shoulder and say "I love you mum and dad but get over it - my wanting to know family isn't a personal attack on you". If they still couldn't get over it, then that is their problem not mine. Luckily, my amom wasn't like that. Btw that doesn't mean one should ride slipshod over their aparents feelings, I am very considerate of my amom's feelings.

I have to admit, I don't understand why any aparents would really care if their adult children wanted to have a relationship with their biological family. If there was danger involved, one could understand. However, in my case, my bfamily like many other bfamilies isn't in the least bit dangerous so why wouldn't one be happy for their child if they did end up having a good relationship with both their bfamily and their afamily? My amom is happy for me and it hasn't affected our relationship, so why do people feel threatened by reuniting adoptees?
I think it's nice that you have a relationship with both. I think that some aparents feel threatened, because they want to be the only parents in the eyes of their child, but it's not reality. There are 2 sets of parents and it's best for the child if all can coexist peacefully, except in cases where there is danger involved.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2013, 04:51 PM
 
1,879 posts, read 1,856,092 times
Reputation: 1462
Quote:
Originally Posted by dogluvr2012 View Post
I think it's nice that you have a relationship with both. I think that some aparents feel threatened, because they want to be the only parents in the eyes of their child, but it's not reality. There are 2 sets of parents and it's best for the child if all can coexist peacefully, except in cases where there is danger involved.
That's true. To me, it also shows a lack of trust in one's child.

Btw note to adoptive parents on here, I am specifically talking about those APs who go out of their way to tell their child that reuniting with bfamily is a betrayal. I do understand that APs are going to feel a little bit funny at first but most then realise that the search by their child is unrelated to their child's relationship with them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Parenting > Adoption
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top