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.
I've met birth parents who dearly wanted contact with a relinquished child and their new family. On the other hand, I've met women who have relinquished who were scared to death that one day the child would come knocking on their door. I met one birth mother who initially was thrilled at the idea of a reunion with the child she placed for adoption only to become scared out her mind when the child began making death threats against her. I know another birth mother who was thrilled at having a reunion and disappointed later when she realized how different the personality of the child was. Eventually, she ended up breaking off contact.
Its a very individual thing. One generalization doesn't fit all cases. I'm grateful for the relationship we have with the birth parents of our children. I think it has added much to our overall adoption experience.
The ultimate question though is does an adopted child have the right to know who their birth parents are? I know the closed adoption system in the USA has brought heartache to many adoptees who want nothing more than to know something of the history of their biological family. As a purely personal matter, I think adoptees should have that right.
In upper middle class families, control of children well into their offspring into their mid twenties. there are a lot of reasons for this. One is a collective stress among people of that class on education. Anything that interferes with education, is seen as problematic.
I can not think of anything that would interfere with education more than an unplanned, out of wed lock pregnancy. That is why they are rare in people of that class. They are not desired nor are they welcomed. They are though of an an interruption in the goals of the girl and of the family.
All of the solidly middle and upper middle class people that I know - and I know a conciderable amount, would still regard an unplanned pregnancy negatively.
Their daughters and sons pregnancy would be regarded as a tragedy and a failure. They - we have strongly inculcated our children with our values. In the case of our children, we expect at least a Master's degree, if not a professional degree or a PhD. A Master's degree puts a person at age 23 or 24 before they are free of parental control.
We are not against sex outside of marriage, but with it comes the responsibility contraception, as well as protection against sexually transmitted diseases. It is a huge responsibility. We have transmitted our believes that becoming sexually involved is a serious undertaking.
IF the tragedy of an unplanned pregnancy would strike our family, there would be no birth and no contact. If it were our daughter, their would be a termination. If it were our son, it would be trickier because the pregnant girl would not be our child, That's why our son has almost a greater responsibility to be careful about the girls he becomes involved with.
Fortunately, he is at a University now where his contact is more limited to people who share our values.
Unplanned pregnancies destroy young lives. Academic and professional careers are derailed or put on hold, social lives are changed, lives are forever changed. As parents we protect our children. Getting pregnant does not make a girl into a woman, and getting a girl pregnant does not make a boy into a man.
We and our peers would want no contact. Our daughter would want no contact, God forbid she would ever become pregnant. Her friends would disprove, their families would disprove, future boyfriend's parents would disprove.
She would not keep the baby and she would never want contact with the baby - she would want to get on with her live and put her past mistake in the past where it belongs.
There are still many people who feel that unplanned pregnancy has a stigma. We are those people. Contact of any sort would be out of the question.
Final note: Yes, anonymity was the goal when the mother was pregnant. It was the goal of the family to protect the family from stigma and shame within their community. The families good name was paramount as to how they existed then. Please ask yourself if that goal was the same as the assumption today that a mother would not want her child to have access to their documents in the future.
And "their documents" means the adopted person's original birth certificate - taking into context the actual report listed in the first post.
Wow, Warrenzee, I value education too and agree that an unplanned pregnancy is not typically welcomed or celebrated but once it happens, it is what it is-a precious child. Sounds almost like the baby is an anathema. Not saying a woman has to raise the child the child but a child is IMHO worth a lot more than education or money.
Wow, Warrenzee, I value education too and agree that an unplanned pregnancy is not typically welcomed or celebrated but once it happens, it is what it is-a precious child. Sounds almost like the baby is an anathema. Not saying a woman has to raise the child the child but a child is IMHO worth a lot more than education or money.
I don't believe in children raising children. Ever. The outcomes are almost always bad. I love babies and children. That's why I feel like I do.
Look at the tragic case of Caylee Anthony. The Anthony's let their daughter get away with everything. She lied and secretly dropped out of school. They did not make her take responsibility for anything.
And now Caylee, a precious innocent child is dead. There are so many adoptive gamilies who would have adopted Caylee in a second. Instead she is dead. I don't know that Casey killed her, but it looks that way. We do know that the baby died in the "care" of Casey.
I know that Casey was a spoiled arrogant teenager who was in need of discipline. The Anthony's were too busy to give her that. Perhaps she should have been forced to give up the baby at birth. And the adoptive parents should not have been forced to have an open adoption. Casey was too selfish to give the baby to a loving couple. She was too lazy to go to school or college. When the novelty of Caylee wore off, who knows what happened.
Casey is now unwelcome in the Anthony's home because of what his daughter said about him in court. I don't blame him for that. I blame both of the senior Anthony's for not raising their daughter and saying "NO" once in a while.
Things like this happen frequently in the homes of unwed mothers who are young and badly educated. We heard about Caylee because in part, she was white and photogenic.
I'm not sure who brought up money, by the way. Money has nothing to do with it.
Last edited by warren zee; 01-24-2013 at 07:06 PM..
I don't believe in children raising children. Ever. The outcomes are almost always bad. I love babies and children. That's why I feel like I do.
Look at the tragic case of Caylee Anthony. The Anthony's let their daughter get away with everything. She lied and secretly dropped out of school. They did not make her take responsibility for anything.
And now Caylee, a precious innocent child is dead. There are so many adoptive gamilies who would have adopted Caylee in a second. Instead she is dead. I don't know that Casey killed her, but it looks that way. We do know that the baby died in the "care" of Casey.
I know that Casey was a spoiled arrogant teenager who was in need of discipline. The Anthony's were too busy to give her that. Perhaps she should have been forced to give up the baby at birth. And the adoptive parents should not have been forced to have an open adoption. Casey was too selfish to give the baby to a loving couple. She was too lazy to go to school or college. When the novelty of Caylee wore off, who knows what happened.
Casey is now unwelcome in the Anthony's home because of what his daughter said about him in court. I don't blame him for that. I blame both of the senior Anthony's for not raising their daughter and saying "NO" once in a while.
Things like this happen frequently in the homes of unwed mothers who are young and badly educated. We heard about Caylee because in part, she was white and photogenic.
I'm not sure who brought up money, by the way. Money has nothing to do with it.
Well, point taken, I guess. I also do not think children raising children is usually a good scenario though I think there can be exceptions to this. In our own case, we adopted the infant son of a young lady just barely 17 when she delivered him. (The father was teen-age as well.)
I guess I just think that some mothers are unable emotionally to just deliver a child and move on with their lives never giving the child much thought. It's different than having a car wreck or a failed exam and "moving on." And I guess I have gotten the impression, yeah, that you value education more than children. If I was mistaken in my perception, I apologize, but honestly, some of your posts rather sound that way. ( I mentioned money because education is often the means to making a good salary.)
I simply fail to understand why you are so adamant that you would never want contact with your grandchild placed for adoption or that your children wouldn't ever want that. Definitely your right to feel that way, but I don't understand what's driving this attitude so intensely.
A study is just that...."a study". In this situation, signal subject studies would be more relevant, because EVERY SINGLE situation can be completely different. There is no way to put quanitative date on a qualitative subject. This is not like presenting a hypothesis and proving a theory. Because there is no way to differentiate between those who want contact and those who do not. You cannot lump 100 subjects in the survey and say 90 want contact, therefore, they ALL DO....
My question is what drives an adoptee to want to view an original birth certificate? I know the obvious, bparent's names, place of birth, time of birth, etc. But how does that "fill" loss or grief often stated by some adoptees? How does reconnecting with bparents, bsiblings, bgrandparents, etc., whether good or bad, make someone's life "better?" If they are not found, or are dead, is your life somehow less now?
I can't help but think that part of it is guilt on the side of the bparent's and wanting to inflict guilt on the side of the adoptee that drives this. Could it be that feeling "not loved" or "rejected" comes from the environment of the adoption itself? Love also means knowing when to let go. Finding that genetic connection is definitely an individual thing. Consider that even with geneaology, some people don't even want to know their ancestors - who are genetically connected to them.
I get the whole forbidden fruit thing, what one cannot have he/she desires most. Rejection, now seems to come full circle. It is almost like the initial rejection felt is compounded by searching and discovering. Yes, one can build relations with the birth mothers, fathers, siblings, etc., but how real can they be if an infant has grown up and has been raised by one family and in adulthood, discovers another family that really knows nothing about the individual and vice versa. Learning to know, love and care for someone takes a lot of effort, and sometimes I think individuals feel that some effort is better than no effort at all. I honestly feel this is what drives most reunions.
My aunt placed a baby for adoption when she was 16. My grandmother, a devout Catholic, let her make the decision. To this day, she is emphatic about not being the child's mother. She now has one adult daughter and one teenage son. She is often asked what she would do if he came looking for her...she still says, I would say, I was too young to raise a child; I am not your mother; I do not want to now build a relationship with you. Not because she is heartless, rather she is solid and resolved with her decision and has never looked back.
Should birth records be sealed. Absolutely. Should there be a place where bparents and adoptees can reconnect, sure, after the child is an adult or if there are medical concerns. A neutral repository that gives basic information about the adoption. Otherwise, you can't secure the rights of the bparents or the adoptee. I think it is a matter of privacy. Any adoption that is open should have the consent of all parties involved; and with infants, this is impossible.
My question is what drives an adoptee to want to view an original birth certificate? I know the obvious, bparent's names, place of birth, time of birth, etc. But how does that "fill" loss or grief often stated by some adoptees? How does reconnecting with bparents, bsiblings, bgrandparents, etc., whether good or bad, make someone's life "better?" If they are not found, or are dead, is your life somehow less now?
I can't help but think that part of it is guilt on the side of the bparent's and wanting to inflict guilt on the side of the adoptee that drives this. Could it be that feeling "not loved" or "rejected" comes from the environment of the adoption itself? Love also means knowing when to let go. Finding that genetic connection is definitely an individual thing. Consider that even with geneaology, some people don't even want to know their ancestors - who are genetically connected to them.
I get the whole forbidden fruit thing, what one cannot have he/she desires most. Rejection, now seems to come full circle. It is almost like the initial rejection felt is compounded by searching and discovering. Yes, one can build relations with the birth mothers, fathers, siblings, etc., but how real can they be if an infant has grown up and has been raised by one family and in adulthood, discovers another family that really knows nothing about the individual and vice versa. Learning to know, love and care for someone takes a lot of effort, and sometimes I think individuals feel that some effort is better than no effort at all. I honestly feel this is what drives most reunions.
My aunt placed a baby for adoption when she was 16. My grandmother, a devout Catholic, let her make the decision. To this day, she is emphatic about not being the child's mother. She now has one adult daughter and one teenage son. She is often asked what she would do if he came looking for her...she still says, I would say, I was too young to raise a child; I am not your mother; I do not want to now build a relationship with you. Not because she is heartless, rather she is solid and resolved with her decision and has never looked back.
Should birth records be sealed. Absolutely. Should there be a place where bparents and adoptees can reconnect, sure, after the child is an adult or if there are medical concerns. A neutral repository that gives basic information about the adoption. Otherwise, you can't secure the rights of the bparents or the adoptee. I think it is a matter of privacy. Any adoption that is open should have the consent of all parties involved; and with infants, this is impossible.
Agree with everything here. Reconnection, if it is to occur must be mutual. Your example is a good one, and I know of many people who feel the way your aunt dies.
Our daughter who was adopted is fine with her birth certificate. More than fine. Since she is Asian and we are not, it is very obvious that she is adopted. She does not want her birth certificate to say the names of people who are not her parents. She wants to have the same rights her brother, who is not adopted has. A small right perhaps, but the right to have the same names as her legal brother has on his - those of her parents. Not strangers.
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.
Money has nothing to do with it.
I have gotten the impression, yeah, that you value education more than children. If I was mistaken in my perception, I apologize, but honestly, some of your posts rather sound that way. ( I mentioned money because education is often the means to making a good salary.)
