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.
But this isn't about how you felt or would have felt about meeting your birth parents. Colin's friend gave an honest answer based upon what Colin has stated to him, obviously. Colin's parents have said all along that they support whatever decision HE makes. So, his feelings are being considered, by his parents. It is his birth mother who is not considering his feelings by circumventing him and going public.
Colin's parents don't find it treasonous, but their son, Colin, may. They are secure with their love of Colin and his of them, they are respecting his wishes.
As I said above, I agree with you about his parents being secure in their love for Colin. They have been very supportive in supporting whatever decision he makes. Thus, if he did feel treasonous re making contact, it would not be because he is concerned about hurting them because he knows that that is not the case.
Thus, one asks oneself why he would feel treasonous about meeting his bmother if he knows it is not going to hurt his family. One doesn't normally feel treasonous about meeting people they care nothing for. That is why I said that he might not have treasonous feelings because if he cares nothing about his bmother but also knows that his parents wouldn't be upset either, he would be more likely to feel nothing at all.
The only reason I mentioned myself is that I was saying I don't have treasonous feelings because I've separated my feelings for APs from BPs, something I am sure that Colin has done as well. The adoptees I know who do feel they would be treasonous meeting their bparents are normally those who are worried their parents might consider any contact with bfamily to be a reflection on their parenting - something that obviously isn't the case with Colin's parents. In fact, his parents seem very very secure in their parenting and they have made it quite clear that whatever decision he makes is alright with them.
Update: I did read a post by Rick Reilly of ESPN where he asked the following:
Quote:
"Is that how you feel?" I asked Kaepernick on Tuesday at Super Bowl media day. "That it would be disrespectful to meet with your birth mother?"
"No," Kaepernick said. "It's not really a respect thing. It's just -- that's my family. That's it."
"But aren't you curious?"
"No."
So, he just isn't interested - it has nothing to do with having treasonous feelings.
I have read about all this before and the one thing that strikes me is that wider population seems more concerned about Heidi and her actions than Colin does himself. Heidi and Colin's parents seem to have a separate relationship with each other and they don't seem to have any problems with her. I think they would tell her if she was overstepping the line.
Btw she made contact with Colin when he was a freshman in college.
Last edited by susankate; 02-27-2013 at 12:16 AM..
I don't understand how, based on the linked article above, you conclude that Russo is not respecting her son's privacy or that she is trying to reach out to him via media. The article says nothing of the kind and does not appear to be based on a sit-down interview considering the sparseness of the info coming from Russo and the fact that the picture they published of her is from her Twitter account, not one taken by Yahoo. Knowing how media often works I would bet that the article is based on a short phone interview which may or may not have been preplanned. You are surely jumping to a lot of conclusions and seem to base your opinions on those.
That's what I feel as well.
That is why I included the article from 2010 - a long time ago - because that shows that she had made contact with him back then. In that article, I get the impression that he talked about his bmother off his own bat. She did not just come out of the woodwork in the last year or so as seems to be the impression given by more recent articles - he was a freshman in college when she first made contact. It is also hard to tell whether she was approached by media outlets or vice versa.
Last edited by susankate; 02-27-2013 at 12:18 AM..
I don't understand how, based on the linked article above, you conclude that Russo is not respecting her son's privacy or that she is trying to reach out to him via media. The article says nothing of the kind and does not appear to be based on a sit-down interview considering the sparseness of the info coming from Russo and the fact that the picture they published of her is from her Twitter account, not one taken by Yahoo. Knowing how media often works I would bet that the article is based on a short phone interview which may or may not have been preplanned. You are surely jumping to a lot of conclusions and seem to base your opinions on those.
The link is just one story published. There have been others, plus she did an interview with ESPN and other news stations. There are also blogs on the topic. So, not jumping to any conclusions. She started reaching out to him a few years ago and kept escalating her "contact" despite him stating he didn't wish to meet her. This is disrepectful, IMO. There is no benefit for the child in the birth parent doing a TV interview when she did not raise her child - whatever the reason for giving him up may have been. I can understand her regretting her decision, but that calls for professional therapy, not a "five minutes of fame" moment on national television...especially days before a major game. Very suspect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ciceropolo
Have not heard of this story until now but am reminded of the Shaquille O'Neal situation early in his career as a famous athlete when the sperm donor (Joe Toney) wanted to mosey into his life and the news cycle. Shaq in his own inimitable style told it like it is (I'm paraphrasing): "My Dad is the man who raised me (his stepfather Phillip Harrison). This person (sperm donor) had nothing to do with my life for 25 years and is not coming into it now for the celebrity."
This is exactly who I thought of too. Shaq and his birth father. Shaq did set the record straight. Colin might need more time to do just that. This kind of story doesn't happen often though. Faith Hill was adopted, but we don't hear of her birth parents "coming out" on TV, etc. She's an adoption advocate too. She doesn't hide this fact about her life.
What I also found interesting is that many adoptees who commented about this story were in favor of Colin's decision. In any case, with freedom of the press and free speech, no one can really tell Russo to stop talking about this. However, in the end, I do feel she is doing more harm towards developing a relationship with Colin than good.
The link is just one story published. There have been others, plus she did an interview with ESPN and other news stations. There are also blogs on the topic. So, not jumping to any conclusions. She started reaching out to him a few years ago and kept escalating her "contact" despite him stating he didn't wish to meet her. This is disrepectful, IMO. There is no benefit for the child in the birth parent doing a TV interview when she did not raise her child - whatever the reason for giving him up may have been. I can understand her regretting her decision, but that calls for professional therapy, not a "five minutes of fame" moment on national television...especially days before a major game. Very suspect.
Where did he state the bolded part? Or more importantly, that he wanted no contact? Because neither of those were in your article.
Originally Posted by susankate Personally, I get sick of articles saying how lucky Colin is that he wasn't aborted. It was the same with Steve Job after he died.
To me that is exploitation of the adoptee.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaded
How so? Colin may very well feel "lucky" he was adopted, that is his right. Just as it is his right to not wish to meet his birth mother. She is exploiting the situation by going public with a very private issue; even if she was contacted by the media first, which I doubt, she could have declined to comment. Whom is she best serving by making statements to the media?
Every adoption is different. Hence, every adoptee's story is different. Some may want reunification, others may not. There should always be respect for one's privacy. Whether that privacy be for the birth parent or the adoptee.
Russo's tactics are extremely suspicious. Colin appears to have picked up on this, and is wisely handling her with kid gloves.
Jaded,
Perhaps re-read Susan Kate's post. You responded with something totally irrelvent.
Susan Kate: get sick of articles saying how lucky Colin is that he wasn't aborted.
Jaded: Colin may very well feel "lucky" he was adopted,
They aren't two sides of the same coin.
Famous adoptees are exploited by both the PRO-LIFE industry as well as the PRO-ADOPTION industry. It is one thing for a famous adoptee to publicly support a cause, it is completely wrong for others to use their status as an adoptee to promote their cause.
Here's a story from January. It says she sought out the media.
“Don’t get me wrong, I am not ‘coming out’ to share in any of the success Colin is having, I just want him to know I never stopped thinking about him,†Russo told the station. “For my family, we will just be cheering for Colin just as loud as the Kaepernicks will be, come Super Bowl.â€
In my opinion, if the media contacted her or she contacted them, she should have refused to say anything. Reunion is a very private matter and Colin may not be ready to meet her now, but maybe he will in the future. He's young and he has a lot going on right now. Also, who wants to go through something so private and so unknown with the media watching?
She obviously has a way to contact him via private message, she should have sent him a message and left it at that.
Here's a story from January. It says she sought out the media.
“Don’t get me wrong, I am not ‘coming out’ to share in any of the success Colin is having, I just want him to know I never stopped thinking about him,†Russo told the station. “For my family, we will just be cheering for Colin just as loud as the Kaepernicks will be, come Super Bowl.â€
In my opinion, if the media contacted her or she contacted them, she should have refused to say anything. Reunion is a very private matter and Colin may not be ready to meet her now, but maybe he will in the future. He's young and he has a lot going on right now. Also, who wants to go through something so private and so unknown with the media watching?
She obviously has a way to contact him via private message, she should have sent him a message and left it at that.
Thanks dogluvr2012! That's my point too. Why go public? She was private all along and then, bam! As he became more popular, she escalated her "contact" even after knowing he still did not wish to meet her. Pretty selfish and self-serving.
Perhaps re-read Susan Kate's post. You responded with something totally irrelvent.
Susan Kate: get sick of articles saying how lucky Colin is that he wasn't aborted.
Jaded: Colin may very well feel "lucky" he was adopted,
They aren't two sides of the same coin.
Famous adoptees are exploited by both the PRO-LIFE industry as well as the PRO-ADOPTION industry. It is one thing for a famous adoptee to publicly support a cause, it is completely wrong for others to use their status as an adoptee to promote their cause.
Ummm, no. I responded according to her statement. She meant that articles stating he's lucky to not have been aborted, and instead, adopted. Otherwise, her statement is irrelevent, not mine. And, he may very well feel "lucky." We have no idea of knowing. We do know that he does not wish to meet or see his birth mother. And, he has had this opinion for more than five years. He is now in his twenties and has not changed his mind.
Regarding famous adoptees, how are they exploited? If you mean they are exploited like Russo is exploiting Colin, then I agree. Other than cases like this, the famous adoptees who don't hide their adoptions don't seem to promote one cause more so than the other if they are not passionate about it themselves. It's not wrong to use celebrities to promote a cause...happens everyday!
Ummm, no. I responded according to her statement. She meant that articles stating he's lucky to not have been aborted, and instead, adopted. Otherwise, her statement is irrelevent, not mine. And, he may very well feel "lucky." We have no idea of knowing. We do know that he does not wish to meet or see his birth mother. And, he has had this opinion for more than five years. He is now in his twenties and has not changed his mind.
Regarding famous adoptees, how are they exploited? If you mean they are exploited like Russo is exploiting Colin, then I agree. Other than cases like this, the famous adoptees who don't hide their adoptions don't seem to promote one cause more so than the other if they are not passionate about it themselves. It's not wrong to use celebrities to promote a cause...happens everyday!
Umm no, I am saying that I am tired of articles written which take a famous adoptee and use them in the debate on abortion - eg saying "Kaeperneck/Job are lucky they weren't aborted and adopted instead". That is exploitation. Job was dead when they used him so he couldn't even answer back.
Imagine also a young adoptee reading those articles, they are likely to then assume that their bmother's choice was "Hmm should I abort this kid or adopt it out instead" when, in fact, that might not have been how things went down at all. It is not fair to make a child feel they are lucky to not have been aborted as that puts an extra pressure on them to conform and be grateful - eg "you should be lucky you are actually breathing - you could have been aborted".
And, he has had this opinion for more than five years.
That is true. My problem is that judging by your post, one would think she just came out of the woodwork and spilt the secret that she was his bmom and she wanted contact. Judging by the article I quoted from 2010, it sounds more like Colin himself has given his bmom's name and said he didn't want contact and in the ensuing 2 or so years he has been asked whether he wishes to meet his bmom, long before she came out and said anything. So that is why I won't jump on the bandwagon condemning her - because I don't know what the full story is. One thing I do know is that she is in contact with his family, just not with him.
But this isn't about how you felt or would have felt about meeting your birth parents. Colin's friend gave an honest answer based upon what Colin has stated to him, obviously. Colin's parents have said all along that they support whatever decision HE makes. So, his feelings are being considered, by his parents. It is his birth mother who is not considering his feelings by circumventing him and going public.
Colin's parents don't find it treasonous, but their son, Colin, may. They are secure with their love of Colin and his of them, they are respecting his wishes.
Excuse me if I am presumptuous, but you seem like you would like it if Colin finds his mother's desire to have contact "treasonous." Unless I hear it from "Colin" I don't believe anything from someone who claims to be his friend. His friend sounds like someone looking for five minutes of fame and doesn't mind exploiting this situation. You have no real proof that is mother is not considering his feelings. Why should she hide her face in shame? She has every right to go public with her experience.
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.
