Conference turris::womannotes-v2

       My father was an adopted child. His mother died giving birth on a
       boat comming over from the UK. That is my total knowledge of any
       family history on my father's side. I don't know what his
       relationship really was with his adopted parents because in the
       entire 18 years I lived at home my dad never discussed it beyond
       a few general comments about where he grew up. We met his
       brothers and sisters once in that time and I don't know if they
       were birth children of his parents or not. 

       I've often wondered why he never spoke of it but we were never
       close enough I felt comfortable asking. He spent most of his time
       away from home as a salesman (gone 2-3 nights a week) and was
       always sort of an outsider even in his own family. Is that a
       trait of adopted children who maybe didn't feel wanted? liesl

    This is a response to but one of the issues raised in the base
    note, that of adoption being "second choice."  
    
    We contacted the adoption agency while I was pregnant [we knew I
    was pregnant, and we had planned it this way for several years],
    and that is all part of another story.  The result was/is two 
    daughters 8 and 1/2 months apart in age:  we waited until the
    first child was born and then requested that the adopted child
    be of the same sex (I had always wanted a sister and my husband
    had always wanted a brother...so, of course, our children were
    going to get stuck with what *we* had wanted but never had!).
    
    We picked up Tracy when she was 2 weeks old, and Kim was then
    9 months old.  From very early on, we used to talk about the
    trip to pick Tracy up.  The girls used to ask "Tell us AGAIN
    about how you picked [me/Tracy] up!" at bedtime.  I would
    carefully repeat what Tracy's clothing and bassinet looked like,
    what Kim was wearing, the name of the social worker who accompanied
    us, how much snow was on the ground:  they asked for incredible
    detail.
    
    Well, I wanted to be sure that Tracy did NOT feel like adoption
    was a second choice, especially because it wasn't!.  So I would
    use phrases like "we chose you special," and talk about how
    long we waited (we had had to contact several agencies in several
    towns).  
    
    So one night, when they were about 4 and 5 years old, during my
    "recital," Kim burst into tears, sobbing "You chose HER SPECIAL,
    but you just 'got' me!"  Never mind that I had also described how
    carefully we had planned for Kim and how we had decorated the
    nursery for her, etc....
    
    Ah...can parents EVER win???
    
    	Pennie

    We have one homegrown child and four adopted. We adopted by
    choice and our kids never have never been anything but 'first
    choice'. We have also been very open about adoption issues.
    All the kids were involved as much as possible in the adoption
    process for subsequent siblings. They went with us when we
    picked up the new sibling and all of us went to court on each
    finalization day. We also celebrated 'coming home' day with
    cake and a present and a special dinner just like a mini birthday.
    (This once made our homegrown son jealous that he only got one
    birthday instead of two!)
    
    I'd adopt more in a minute if we had the space and the time to
    give to more kids. We still look at the "sunday's child" in
    the Globe occasionally!
    
    To date none of our kids has shown any interest in finding their
    birth parents. We have, however, told them that we would help
    them if they ever want to search.
    
    Bonnie

    
    My Aunt and Uncle had always wanted children, but for some reason
    were unable to have them. My Aunt had a very tough time getting
    pregnant and when she did, she'd lose the baby. They decided to
    adopt. After many years of waiting, they adopted my cousin. I'm
    not sure exactly how old she was at the time, but she was just a
    tiny baby.
    
    I think that one of the best things they have ever done with/for her
    is similar to the story that .2 told. From way before my cousin
    was able to understand what they were talking about, they told her
    the story of how they got her and how that made her extra-special. 
    As soon as Susie could talk, she was repeatedly asking for 
    "The 'Doption Lady" story.  
    
    re: .2 Pennie - I have only one question - well, maybe not a question,
    just an observation. When my Aunt and uncle were trying to adopt,
    there were long waiting lists and they had to wait many years before
    a child was available for them. Also, if I remember correctly, the
    criteria for receiving a child "quickly" included being unable to
    have a child of their own. So it kind of surprised me to read that
    you were able to adopt at the same time you were having a child
    yourself. Maybe that's a function of the time (about 11 years ago)
    and the place (New York state) they tried to adopt.
             
    -Amy.                                              

    re .4
    
    People who can have biological children and who also adopt usually
    are adopting kids who are for some reason considered not to be
    easily adoptable. This can be mixed racial children, or children
    with a mental or physical handicap. I don't know if this was true
    in Penny's case but it was in ours. 
    
    Bonnie
    
    p.s. To adoptive parents all their children are 'their own'. I know
    people don't realize how it sounds but when people ask me which
    of my children are 'my own' I answer that 'they all are'.

    re: .4 and .5
    
    This was 20 years ago, but the situation was the same then:
    if you wanted a "healthy white infant" there was a long wait.
    For those other children in need of homes, well, there were more
    children than homes.  We actually had planned all along to make
    these two children the first of three such pairs (and with any
    luck, we hoped to have two pairs of one sex, and one pair of the
    other)...but then we got divorced, and all I can say is that
    given that I was a single parent for many years, I'm glad I
    didn't have to raise SIX...talk about being outnumbered! ;-)
    
    	Pennie

    Could someone summarize the procedure one goes through in order
    to adopt a child?
    
    Thanks,
    
    Nance

    I think there are dramatic differences in the adoption process when
    infertility is not an issue.  In your lives, Bonnie & Pennie, adoption
    then was a choice rather than an option to be resigned to because
    of infertility.  It seems, too, that there has been an openness
    from the start with your children, giving them permission to talk
    about the adoption and their feelings about it.  That openness will
    make a difference in how adoptees develop and feel about themselves
    as individuals.
    
    Right now more than ever, I suppose, we're seeing in the media the
    focus on heroic measures that couples go through to produce a child
    from 'their own genes'.  I don't know if one can generalize by saying
    that in what appears to be an obsessive need to reproduce one's self,
    this driving force has given rise to the frequency of surrogate
    births, and the resulting lawsuits from such 'contracts'.  I know
    for myself I have to be very careful about venturing into the waters
    of discussing surrogate births.  In my calm moments about the issue,
    I can have a rational discussion.  When my adoptee emotions kick
    in, I rage about the issue.  I feel that there is a BIG difference
    between a woman who gets pregnant and is without the resources to
    raise that child and therefore surrenders the child for adoption
    and a woman who intentionally gets pregnant, who from the onset
    had no intention of ever keeping the child, and who stands to gain
    a profit from this venture.  To me, that's called selling babies,
    which I have equated as this society's new wave slavery.  It is
    a strong term, perhaps.  When the Baby M case broke on the news
    wires, Time or Newsweek ran an article about surrogacy.  They
    interviewed various women who had participated in the venture. 
    One woman was a single parent with two children in the age bracket
    of 8 - 10, maybe a little younger, and it seemed pretty evident
    that the father of her children was not in the picture in terms
    of child support or any active role in parenting these children.
    This woman was at an economic disadvantage.  She talked about how
    she wanted to give her children opportunities that she didn't have,
    and in order to get money to do this, she planned to have at least
    two surrogate births in order to send them to private school.  There
    is nothing, currently, in our system to prevent surrogate births
    from becoming as much of an ecomonic force as was the practice of
    slavery.  It is still an issue of economics, the rich can afford
    to buy babies, the poor can sell them.  In this situation, for a
    change, economically disadvantaged women are making the profit,
    not the rich folks.  But the thing that is so very lacking in all
    the analysis re: surrogate births (they talk about the mother, the
    father, the adoptive mother, the legality of the contract) no one
    is talking about what this is going to do to the child.  And no
    one can predict, right now, what in fact this will to do the children
    caught in the bind of surrogate battles, or just knowing that s/he
    was sold by his/her mother.  There are two issues within surrogate
    births, births for profit and births where no money 'changes hands'
    so to speak.
    
    This discussion of surrogacy is a bit off the original intent of
    this note, but that is, sometimes, how my mind works when I start
    getting into adoption discussion.
    
    Even in the most positive settings for adoptees, and I know many
    who have been raised by parents that were open to talking about
    the issues, when they reached their adult lives the hard questions
    started.
    
    Open adoption systems are worlds different than closed adoption
    systems.  I met a woman this summer who gave birth to a son when
    she was 16 years old.  She realized from the start that there was
    no way that she could be a parent to him given her circumstances,
    so she chose adoption.  The amazing thing for me to hear from her
    about her experiences is that she got to say what HER needs were
    and they were met.  She chose who the parents would be.  She had
    certain conditions written into the adoption contract (this was
    a private adoption and not through an agency) such as, she would
    be sent pictures of her son and a progress report every year on
    his birthday.  She kept an extensive journal during her pregnancy
    and birth and she was able to keep her son with her for three days
    before she signed the papers terminating her parental rights.  When
    this child reaches majority age he is to be given these journals
    and letters that his birthmother wrote for him.
    
    This is a far cry of difference from some of my birthmother friends
    who were not 'allowed' to see or hold these babies they had just
    given birth to.  They were treated like something lower than pond
    scum for having gotten 'in trouble'.  They had no rights, they did
    not have their needs met, they were not given the opportunity to
    make peace with their decision and find some way to separate from
    their baby.  The structure was set up to punish them for their
    mistakes.
    
    There are still closed adoptions happening in this country today,
    but we need to be doing things differently, more humanely.  Adoption
    is not the problem, it's how we do adoption that is the problem.
    
    And finally, the respond to lisel's question about the distancing
    her father did from other people...that is not an uncommon reaction
    in adoptee's.  Sometimes you feel like, well if I let this person
    become important to me then s/he will go away...
    
    Adoption impacts adoptees in the areas of bonding with others, trusting
    others.  I believe that the issues are even greater in situations
    where it has been not o.k. to talk about feelings as an adoptee.
    It sounds like there are alot of unanswered questions and unfinished
    business for your father and his relationship to his family of origin
    and his adoptive family.  It is never too late to face our issues
    and grow and change, maybe your father will want to take this on
    someday.  There are adoption networks all over the country, places
    where adoptees/birthparents/adoptive parents come together and talk,
    say the hard things, express their feelings, and learn from each
    other and grow.  If you want a listing of these organizations, let
    me know and I'll send you a resouce listing.
    
    Before I wrap up this very long note, I want to find my way back
    to the original start of this note by saying, Pennie, I was really
    touched by your daughter's reaction to not being adopted.  Kids
    are such a trip, aren't they?  And I am encouraged and moved that
    you are all talking and staying open.
      

    Some books that may be of interest...
    
    Living Mistakes
      A collection of birthmother's stories
    
    I Would Have Searched Forever
      by Sandy Muesser  
      Story of Sandy's search for the daughter she relinquished
    
    Helping Women Cope with Grief
      
    The Social Worker's Role in Adoption
    
    Thoughts to Consider for Newly Searching Adoptees
    
    The above books and booklets are available through:
    
      Concerned United Birthparents (CUB)
      National Headquarters
      2000 Walker Street
      Des Moines, IA 50317
    
    Another excellent book for anyone involved in the Adoption Triad
    is:  The Art of Adoption by Linda Cannon Burgess.
    
    Linda is a wonderful social worker who has placed hundreds of babies
    in their adoptive homes.
    
    If anyone wants information on the two major adoption organizations,
    The American Adoption Congress (AAC) and Concerned United Birthparents
    (CUB), you can request information from me through VAXmail PRYDE::ERVIN
    or all-in-one Laura Ervin @OGO.
    

    As I mentioned elsewhere recently, my SO, his sister, and a
    goodly share of his cousins are adopted.  Several of our
    friends are adopted ("adapted" as one of them calls herself).
    I've noticed little phrases John uses in talking about early
    family life, such as "I remember when we got Jill" rather
    than "Jill's birth" or "when they brought Jill home."  His
    parents tend *not* to talk about the adoption process much;
    I've gotten the impression that he would have liked to hear
    more details about the whole thing when he was a child, but
    that it doesn't matter as much to him now. 

    One thing that is true for him is that he considers his
    parents to be his parents, plain and simple, whether he
    shares genes with them or not.  (He jokes about how he has
    inherited certain skills from his father.)  They raised him
    from birth, they guided him as he formed his opinions, his
    perspectives, his identity, and so forth, just as my parents
    did for me.  He has no interest in searching for his
    biological parents, although he does wish that the laws of
    his birth state would allow the release of medical history. 

    Perhaps because John has no interest in finding his
    biological parents, I find it a little difficult to
    understand why some people feel such a strong need to
    discover and meet with their biological parents.  Could
    someone give me some insight into this? 

    -- Linda

  
    This is a rather long article, but I think that Susan Darke can
    far better state some of issues being addressed here than can I.
    For the questions that have been raised in note .10, there may be
    some answers within this newspaper article.
    
    

       Attacking the Adoption Barrier  by Linda Matchan

Reprinted from the Boston Globe, March 23, 1986 without permission


"If you buy a puppy, you get papers for it," Susan Darke reasons. "So if 
puppies have papers, why shouldn't I?"

The analogy is that simple to Darke, who is the founder and director of The 
Adoption Connection, a Peabody (MA) adoption search and support group.  
Herself an adoptee who spent 15 years searching for her birth family, Darke 
today is a tireless advocate for adoptees' rights, and, in particular, for 
their right to meet their biological or birth parents if they so choose.

But, in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, it is impossible for adoptees to 
obtain access to their originial birth certificates.  They may obtain a 
copy of the amended certificate, which bears the name of the adoptive 
parents, not the birth parents.  And it is almost impossible for adoptees 
to get any identifying information about their birth parents from the 
courts or adoption agencies.

However, on April 9, a new state law will go into effect that will make it 
a least a little easier for adoptees to learn about their heritage.

The new Adoption Records Law guarantees that adoptees over the age of 18 
will be able to get non-identifying information about their birth parents 
from their adoption agency, and, likewise, guarantees birth parents 
non-identifying information about the family their child was placed with; 
non-identifying information includes such data as educational background, 
interests and medical histories.

The law will require adoption agencies to release identifying information 
to adoptees over the age of 21 and to their birth parents, but only if they 
have received written permission from both parties--this is, on the slim 
chance that both parties have independently contacted the agencies.

The bill "is a good beginning," Darke said in a recent interview.  "And I 
guess that says it: A beginning."  She would like to see a bill passed that 
would give all adult adoptees access to their birth certificates, if they 
so choose.  "It's something every other human being has," she says.

If Darke sound somewhat impatient, perhaps it is because at 41 she has been 
traveling the adoption road a very long time.  She has approached the issue 
of searching her past from almost every imaginable angle.  She was adopted 
when she was an infant, and, as a teen-ager, gave birth to her own child, 
whom she immediately gave up for adoption.  When Darke was 20, she began a 
cross-country search for her family, which led her to her mother, her son, 
her father's mother and other members of her extended family.  It takes 
nearly three hours just to recount the details of what happened.

Some of the reunions were joyful, while others were not.  But, she says, 
she would never have done it any other way, and regrets that most people 
don't give any member of the adoption triangle credit for being able to 
handle the repercussions of a search.  "Everyone assumes the negative, the 
worst," she says, "like what if she wants to move in with you, or what if 
she is poor or sleazy?  The image surrounding the birth family is that 
somehow it is going to be disruptive."

She disagrees that it has to be, despite the fact that her own story is 
almost soap opera fare.

She grew up in Louisville, Ky., an only child adopted at the age of 3 
months by prosperous parents who weren't able to have children of their 
own.  Back then, in 1944, "if you couldn't have babies, the answer was 
simple," Darke says.  "You adopted."

But like most adoptive families at that time, Darke says her parents never 
thought much about the future.  "They never really thought that this baby 
with blond curls they took as their own might grow up to have questions 
about her background."

The told her she was adopted, but it hadn't made much of an impression.  
The first clear recollection she has of hearing the word "adoption" was in 
the second grade, following an altercation in the schoolyard over someone's 
jumprope.  She says she probably pocketed it, but insisted that she hadn't, 
and one of the children screamed at her: "how do you know? You're adopted!"

The word was spit out, like a curse.  "There was something abot how the kid 
said it, that I realized for the first time I was different," she says.  "I 
went home in tears."  Her mother tried to console her by explaining Darke 
had been "chosen" and she was "special," and that her birth mother had 
loved her, but couldn't take care of her.

The explanation satified Darke, at least for a while.  "But around when I 
turned 12, more information became important," Darke says, "maybe because 
I was learning about sex, and I started thinking about where I came from.  
I wondered, who is my mother?  Why did she give me up?  Was she married?"

She demanded more information from her parents, but got none.  "Don't 
forget," says Darke, "that was back in the days when they had been told to 
go home (from the adoption agency) with their baby and live happily ever 
after.  Nobody had prepared them for my questions.  They were just trying 
to protect me from the stigma of being the child of an unwed mother."

Lacking information about her birth mother, she fantasized endless 
scenarios about her.  "The fantasies went from the very worst to the very 
best," Darke says.  "From a hooker on the street to the queen of England."

She would look in the mirror and try to conjure up a mother who looked like 
her; once, she heard that Marilyn Monroe had given up a child, and Darke 
convinced herself that she was that child.  Other times, she grew 
discouraged that there wasn't a single person in the world she could call a 
blood relative.

"It was a feeling of not having been born," she says.  "Most people hear 
stories about their mothers' pregnancies--about whether it was a long or 
short delivery, about their dad pacing the halls.  I heard about the day 
they picked me up and about my parents handing rattles in the windows so 
the neighbors would know that was the day I was coming home.  It was a 
beautiful story, but it wasn't the same.  There was a connection that I 
missed.  It's true, this was my family, but there was a question about who 
had had me before they had me."

By the age of 15, she was organizing what she now refers to with some 
amusement as her "search parties."  Saturday night was the night her 
parents went out, and it was the night Darke would invite her friends over 
to rummage through the house.  Their mission was to find anything that 
would be a clue to her identity.  Finally, in a little metal box in a 
closet, Darke found the adoption finalization document, a starched document 
typed in white ink.

"I remember seeing, "Patricia Ann Mattingly, illegitimate child of this 
17-year-old unwed mother..."  I remember being frozen to the spot and 
thinking that was me! and wondering, "Why did she name me if she was going 
to give me up?"

Her parents were terribly distressed at her discovery.  "They thought I was 
looking for another mother," Darke says.  They didn't understand that I was
looking for me.  For a piece of myself."

Darke paused for a minute.  The she says: "Nine months later I was pregnant 
myself.  Sixteen and unmarried and pregnant."

In an uncanny recapitulation of what she had imagined to be the case in her 
mother's like, she had had a careless sexual relationship with a boy her 
parents had forbidden her to see.  "My need to identify with her was so 
strong," Darke says.

Her parents were outraged.  Abortion was mentioned, but Darke refused. "No 
one knew how important this baby was to me," she explained. "This was me.  
This was the only being I knew I was related to."

Darke had an uncle who lived 300 miles away in Nashville, and immediately 
her parents made plans to send her there, to a home for unwed mothers.  The 
story they concocted for friends and relatives was that they were sending 
Darke to Tennessee for her senior year of high school because they didn't 
like the boy she was dating.

When she began to gain weight, her mother took her to one of the very best 
shops in town and bought her corsets to bind her breasts and stomach.  And 
then, off she went to Nashville for the final five months of her pregnancy, 
where she joined 60 other pregnant unwed teen-agers.  This may have been 
1961, but the setting was Dickensian.  The home was surrounded, literally, 
by a wall of brick.  The girls were assigned false first names--Darke was 
supposed to be Veronica from Chicago--and they were all given the same last 
name of 'Right' ("I always thought it should have been 'Wrong',"  Darke 
says) as a code, in case anyone tried to telephone them and check up on 
them.  At Christmas time, they were given postcards from Florida and 
instructed to send them to their families, who could then show them to 
their friends and say their daughters were away on vacation.

The situation "didn't leave you with much self-esteem," Darke says.  The 
girls were told that if they loved their babies, they would give them up, 
that they would be able to have other babies someday, that by relinquishing 
their babies, they would be making another couple happy.

"I came away thinking that I wasn't important, but that others were," she 
says.  "And although what they told us made sense at 17, by 30, you begin 
to question, 'What did I do?'  For years after that, you question your 
ability to be a parent."

She remembers hoping she would have a boy, because "for some crazy reason" 
she assumed a boy would be spared the unhappiness she had felt as an 
adopted child.  "I felt boys wouldn't care.  They weren't emotional.  They 
weren't sensitive."

She did, in fact, have a boy.  She named him William James, and saw him 
just once, when she snuck down to the hospital nursery.  He was way in the 
back, far away from the window; when she asked the nurse why he was hidden, 
she was told, "You know.  Your situation..."  "Already," says Darke, "he 
was at the back of the room."

She stared at him long and hard because she knew this image would have to 
last a lifetime.  And that was it; her son was gone.  She signed a paper, 
in triplicate, that formalized the surrender of her baby, completed her 
senior year in Tennessee, and went home with her class ring and diploma.  
"And no one was the wiser."

But she couldn't forget her baby.  She went to nursing school, married a 
"wonderful man," had four daughters in short order, but still she couldn't 
forget.  Nor did her own adoption cease to figure into her adult life.  If 
a doctor asked for her medical history, she wasn't able to provide it.  If 
someone at a PTA meeting asked her how many children she had had, she would 
uncomfortably tell a lie.  "What do you say? 'I gave up a baby 18 years 
ago'?"

Her eyes mist over as she speaks.  She tells of her decision 20 years ago 
to search for her birth mother, despite her misgivings--"that old thing of 
how if I searched it would ruin my birth mother's life and kill my adoptive 
parents"--and how it took eight years to track down her birth mother in 
Georgia.  Her mother, it turned out, was a sales representative who had 
been married, divorced, and then married again.  She had become pregnant 
with Darke at the age of 16; the 19-year-old father had abandoned her 
because he didn't want the responsibility of a child.

She tells of their first emotional meeting, during which Darke felt 
compelled to stare at her mother's stomach ("I remeber thinking, "That's 
where I came from") and of how they then corresponded for a time, but 
finally, after only four visits in six years, quietly severed their 
relationship.

"Her strength came from never looking back," says Darke.  "She put up a 
wall so she wouldn't be hurt again.  She is still afraid of what the 
neighbors would think."

She adds: "Would I do it again?  A hundred times. Now I can pick up the 
phone if I want to and call her.  I know my medical history.  I don't have 
to look at strangers any more and wonder if they are related to me."  Her 
adoptive mother, she says, was initially upset when Darke decided to 
search, but "is now my biggest supporter."

She tells of her decision, two years after meeting her birth mother, to try 
to find her birth father, and of how she first tracked down his mother in 
Kentucky only to find that her father had been killed in a car accident at 
the age of 33.  She tells of going out to Kentucky to meet the grandmother 
anyway--a grandmother who had never even known that Darke was conceived and 
to whom she bore an astonishing resemblance--and ultimately developing a 
"marvelous" relationship with her and with other relatives, who embraced 
Darke and her children as family.

The grandmother died a year and a half ago, but the relationship "gave me a 
lot."  Darke says, "With her, I seem to have found me."

And she explains how 10 years ago when she and her husband decided not to 
have any more children, she had an overpowering urge to locate her son, who 
would then have been 14.  "All of a sudden I thought, what if he died of 
crib death, or his parents died?  I wanted to make it easier for him to 
find me, should he desire to."

She says that through a contact that she had made during her searched, she 
determined that his new name was Tom Kotts, and that he lived in a small 
town in Michigan.  Since she didn't want to intrude on his family life, she 
began to subscribe to his hometown newspaper to "keep and eye on him from a 
distance," on the chance that his name would be mentioned.  Three years 
later, she did come across his name.  She read that her son had been in a 
motorcycle accident, that he was in a coma and wasn't expected to live.
  
She tells of writing to his parents to identify herself, and a few days 
later getting a telephone call from the boy himself.  He was in the 
hospital and had miraculously pulled out of the coma.  He and his family 
wanted to meet her, and a month later she flew out to Michigan where she 
visited for four days.  She saw home movies of Tom as a baby, told him 
about his sisters, caught up on the last 17 years.

"It's such a wonderful relationship," says Darke, who notes proudly that 
[ATom, now 24, has made her a grandmother twice.  "We're kind of this 
extended family.  But I'm not Mom, Virginia, his adoptive mother, is Mom.  
I am Susan to him."

Tom, for his part, says in a telephone interview that he is glad that Darke 
found him.  "I never found words to express how I felt at first.  It was 
shocking.  But there is a lot of happiness there that she made the effort 
to come look for me and find out where I was."

From all of this, and from her work with adoptees, Darke has come to a few 
conclusions about the importance of searching for one's birth parents.  
While she ackowledges that not all searches end happily--"I had three 
searches, and all three had different outcomes"--she believes it is 
imperative for adoptees to feel they hae the option of searching for their 
families, as long as they conduct the search discretely and confidentially. 
She believes, too, that birth parents who are contacted by the children 
they relinquished owe these children at least a little of their time.

"I didn't give up a sack of potatoes," she says.  "I gave up a human being. 
I owe that child at least an hour, to help resolve these issues."  Even if 
the reunion is an uncomfortable or unpleasant one, she says, it may still 
be successful from the adoptee's point of view.

"The biggest hurt is not knowing anything," she says, and notes that this 
is how The Adoption Connection came by its motto:  "It is not what you 
find, but that you have found it."

    

    Reminder: This topic is extremely sensitive for many people. Please
    tread lightly when responding. Also, if you'd would like to discuss
    their experiences anonymously, the moderators would be happy to
    post your note for you.
    
    Liz Augustine
    comoderator

    Laura,
    
    I just read the entire article in 166.11. Thanks for entering that;
    it touched me.
    
    Slightly misty,
    Liz

    Rather than using the words of Susan Darke, I would like to repond
    to Linda's note .10 re: her SO being an adoptee.
    
    I have yet to meet an adoptee who had searched for his/her family
    of origin that didn't consider his/her adoptive parents the parents.
    But for adoptees it's not quite plain and simple.  While my parents
    are my parents, emotionally, psychologically, they raised me, they
    provided for me a good home with advantages that I may not have
    had if I had been raised by my birthmother, there is no getting
    around the fact that biologically I am attached to two other people.
    
    Your SO 'jokes' about how he has inherited certain skills from his
    father, but I would like to point out that many of us joked about
    genetic or hereditary traits because we had no real information
    with which to work.  Humor can sometimes mask emotions beneath the
    surface, like hurt or anger or confusion.  I remember I used to
    joke around and try to make myself feel better by saying that I
    was a truly free spirit and unique individual because I was rootless.
    Deep down inside I longed to know what my real nationality was,
    I wanted to know about the missing parts of my life, about my birth
    and the first 5 months of my existence.
    
    It seems that your SO's parents may not have been real comfortable
    in talking about adoption like my parents weren't comfortable with
    it.  I learned, as a very small child, age 7, that I really shouldn't
    try to discuss adoption with them.  I saw in their eyes the hurt
    and fear, like maybe I didn't want them as my parents.  In the case
    of infertility, no one likes to talk about the fact that adoptive
    parents may feel inferior or that they won't be good parents because
    they didn't have the child 'naturally'.  Not that the birthing process
    makes a person a better or worse parent.  However, in the 40's and
    50' there was a  lot of emphasis put on having your 'own' children.
    So folks who became parents through adoption sometimes feel like
    they have to try harder, or that parenting won't come 'naturally'
    to them.  Your SO may have also gotten messages that said to him,
    'don't ask questions.'  
    
    In asking questions or thinking about searching, we adoptees run
    the risk and have to grapple with our own fears about hurting our
    parents.  They won't understand. They will think that we don't love
    them or don't want them as our parents.  Denial and fantasy are
    a big part of an adoptee's life.  We deny our feelings for fear
    of betraying our parents, and betrayal is a big issue, and then
    we fantasize about these ideal unknown parents.
    
    Not all adoptees got cut from the same mold.  John may not feel
    the need to search, and that's fine, but there are others of us
    who do.  Girls/women tend to think about searching a lot earlier
    than do boys/men.  That may have something to do with the fact that
    women are the ones who get pregnant and so there is an easier
    identification for women to their birthmothers.
    
    My older sister has never even wanted to discuss the fact that she
    is adopted.  She did not want to tell her fiance before they got
    married.  She did tell him because my mother had a long talk with
    her that she should not keep secrets, etc., or whatever she may
    have said to her.  Although my sister clearly doesn't even want
    to look at the issue, she has not really bonded with the family.
    She is not well-adjusted, and whenever she has conflicts with my
    parents she threatens to walk out and never come back.  As angry
    as I have been with my parents, I could never, for one instant,
    ever consider severing relationships with them.  So lack of interest
    in adoption issues is not an indication of how well a person has
    adapted to being adopted.
    
    In fact, it is the secure and stable adoptees who often search.
    They have the inner strength and the sense of connection with their
    family that makes them feel that nothing in their life could sever
    the tie between them and their (adoptive) parents.
    
    As I have stated before, in physical appearance I am very different
    than my family.  The same goes for my personality and my talents.
    I did not look like ANY other relative when I was growing up.  We
    adoptees have our mirror stories, how many hours did we stare in
    the mirror trying to pull together an image of birthmother or
    birthfather?  People who grow up in their biological families take
    for granted the comments such as, "oh, she has Grandma Smith's eyes,"
    or "he has Aunt Mabels musical talents", or "he is the image of
    his father's father..."  
    
    I used to get questions such as, "how can you be Sue Ervin's sister,
    you don't look anything alike?"  or "I wouldn't have recognized
    you to be Alice Ervin's daughter..."  People don't think and don't
    understand what these kinds of questions and comments can mean,
    especially if these folks have no idea that they're saying it to
    an adoptee.
    
    Since I seem to be the only big-mouth adoptee active in this particular
    note for the moment, I hope that these comments will give you some
    insight.  I am really hoping that other adoptees with come forward
    (I mean I can't be the ONLY one out of 120,000 employees, right?...or
    maybe I am!) and birthparents, I hope you speak up too.  Although
    a lot of what I say here reflects my own experiences, I have met
    hundreds of adoptees and birthparents during these past three years
    and can draw some generalizations based on their experiences.
    
    So please, other adoptees/birthparents...speak up.
    

  My husband and I have been considering adopting an older or 
  minority child. Are such adoptions considered "special needs"
  adoptions? Does anyone out there know the requirements for the
  adoptive parents in such cases? Must we be infertile, for example?
  Does the adoption process in these cases involve long waiting
  periods, as with regular (non-minority, infant, physically-
  challenged) adoptions?
   
  Thanks for any answers anyone can provide!

    I am trying to respond to this with sensitivity. But I know that
    I cannot relate at all. I can only feel fortunate that I can make
    the choice not to be in the birthmother position. I don't think
    I could handle a person who looks like me coming up to me and saying
    that I'm a parent, especially if it was something I had lived my
    life wanting to forget.  But that's just me.
    
    I happen to know that I'm quite fertile. I have been thinking of
    adopting, and I don't know whether I would be upset if my child chose
    to search for parents, but as I think about this, I know that it
    would rock my psyche somewhat. 
    
    Giving birth must be (for the fertile ones) the easiest part of 
    parenting. Or is it just getting pregnant.
                                                
    
    In general, Laura, you're certainly raising some heavy issues. I'm
    glad you're made of strong stuff.

    re: .5
    
    >p.s. To adoptive parents all their children are 'their own'. I know
    >people don't realize how it sounds but when people ask me which
    >of my children are 'my own' I answer that 'they all are'.      
     
    Bonnie - As the one who used the phrase in question here, let me
    apologize. I really did think about it when I wrote it  but I woke
    up in a real fog this morning and I could not think of another way
    to put it. I agree wholeheartedly that all of one's children are
    'one's own', regardless of whether one biologically created that
    child or not. I did not mean to seem insensitive.
    
    -Amy.
    

    In terms of "special needs" children and requirements of the
    adoptive parents, because there are more children than suitable
    homes usually, there is not a waiting period per se, but rather,
    the time it takes to process the application.
    
    It seems to me [and this is just an observation, because I have
    not been as active in this area as I used to be] that the children
    most in need of homes now tend to be older and/or have some type
    of physical/emotional difficulties and/or be in a sibling group.
    I'm not sure if there is still an urgent need for homes for
    healthy infants of any ethnic background -- Bonnie, do you know
    the situation these days?
    
    I do know from the recent experience of several friends that
    adopting a reasonably healthy infant from a foreign country (in
    these cases they were all from South America), there were
    horrendous entanglements with people who seemed perhaps not really
    to be lawyers, etc., and they kept having to "send another thousand
    dollars for unexpected xxx expenses."  The babies *did* finally
    get to their new homes, but there were several years of anguish
    along with the waiting.  I guess the lesson here is to get some
    good references about any agency, and be very careful about private
    foreign adoptions.
    
    Please don't hesitate to contact me off-line for more information.
    
    Good luck,
    		Pennie

    Hello Pennie or Bonnie or any other adoptive parents in this note
    file...
    
    Can you offer some insights to Nance from note .7 who wants to know
    about the adoption procedure or to noter .15 who is wondering what
    the time differences, ease, etc. is in a special needs adoption
    vs. a non-special needs adoption....
    
    When you have a free moment.  I really can't speak to the adoption
    procedures issues.
    
    Thanks for your help.
    
    Laura
    

    [here goes again...why do I just *know* that I am going to enter
    more replies to this note than to all other notes in all other
    conferences combined??? :-)  ]
    
    WHAT *IS* THE PROPER 'TERM'?
    
    I've had trouble with just about anything.  Using "biological
    child" in place of "own child" doesn't work either.  The
    adopted child is non-biological?  So far I like Bonnie's
    "home grown" but even that...well, there was a lot of
    "home growing" to be done by and with both children when they
    joined us as the newest additions to our family! 
    
    	Pennie

    Amy,
    
    I know that you didn't mean to seem insensitive, and I am also
    aware that is true of almost everyone who uses the phrase 'own
    child'....I tried to phrase my objection gently enought so that
    you wouldn't think I had taken offense. I was just trying to
    educate a little.
    
    and thanks for your response.
    
    Bonnie
    
    p.s. the one place where the phrase does upset me is in newspaper
    articles about death or some other tragedy occuring to a child
    when the article will say "Johnny was the  Smiths adopted child,
    the Smiths also have 3 children of their own."

    This is all very interesting.  I found .11 to be very moving.  The
    issues surrounding adoption are something I haven't thought about
    a lot.  I have thought about the issue of birth mothers giving up
    their babies and I have come to the conclusion that it's something
    that I, personally, could never bring myself to do.  I respect others
    reasons for doing so, but I know I couldn't live with the decision
    myself.  (To actually give birth to a baby and give it away would
    hurt me more than an abortion.  But, I don't really know if I'd
    ever have an abortion myself either even tho I'm definitely pro-choice
    for others.)
    
    I can definitely understand adopted children wanting to find out
    about their birth parents.  I have always enjoyed hearing stories
    about my own ancestors.  For example, my grandfather tracked his
    (male of course) lineage back to 1066 to a general who came from
    Normandy to England with William the Conquerer.  So, when I think
    about it, imagine, I even know (sort of) what one of my ancesters
    was doing in 1066 (raping & pillaging!) and others don't even know
    what their own birth parents spent their lives doing.  
    
    Other things come to mind that I've always taken for granted, too.
     I can remember someone saying to my parents when I was little,
    "You can tell she's not the milkman's, huh?"  (I look just like
    a female version of my father) and I can remember my mother many
    times saying to me, "You remind me so much of my mother sometimes!"
    (Her mother died before I was born.)
    
    I have boxes of tin types of ancestors, letters written by an uncle
    who was killed in WWII, and journals written by grandfather, and
    my mother's diaries.  It would seem really strange to imagine not
    having these connections to people from the past whom I know I'm
    related to.  So, I know that if I were adopted I would definitely
    want to find out the whole story of who my real parents were, and
    my nationality, and everything.  I think people have a right to
    know these things about themselves.  It helps to give you a clearer
    idea of who you feel you are.
    
    I had never realized the complexities of these situations before.
    
    Lorna
    

    Penny, I think I am going to have the same problem!
    
    okay, 'Homegrown' was actually a term that my oldest son
    came up with at the age of eight. We had gone into Boston
    to adopt our youngest daughter who is now nearly 11. (She
    was then 7 months old.) We stopped at the HoJos in Fresh
    Pond for lunch, with Don and I on one side of a large booth
    and Michael (8), Peter (5) and Judy (4) on the other side
    and Jessie in a baby carrier on the table! We were all talking
    away about Jessie and an elderly couple came up to us and
    asked us if they could see our baby. They had heard our conversation
    and had come over because they had adopted 4 or 5 kids back
    during the depression! The woman asked my kids if they were
    all adopted. Michael answered, 'No, they 're adopted" indicating
    his siblings with a wave of his hand, "I'm homegrown."
    
    As to speical needs adoptions. They generally are much quicker.
    In Massachusetts there are two ways that special needs kids are
    brought to the attention of the public. On Wednesday nights
    on channel 4 (I think, somebody correct me if I'm wrong we have
    no tv currently) there is a program called Wednesday's child
    that features a child or children in need of a home 2 or 3 times
    a month and has adoption related features other nights. In
    the Boston Globe on Sundays there is also Sunday's child - again
    a child or children needing parents. These kids do tend to be
    grade school age or older. 
    
    The Massachusetts Adoption Resource Exchange (MARE) puts out
    photo pages of waiting children each month. These pages are kept
    by volunteers and put into notebooks which interested potential
    parents can look at. The age range of these children is a bit
    wider, toddlers and some times infants are incuded, as well as
    sibling groups. If you want to look at  a copy of the adoption
    notebook call up MARE in Boston and ask for the name of a person
    near you who has a copy.
    
    We haven't adopted in 7 years so my information is also a bit out
    of date.
    
    Laura, one problem with completely open adoptions is that the
    adoptive parents could fear that the child/baby could be taken
    from them if the birth mother knew who they were. I do think,
    however, that a yearly exchange of pictues and anonymous letters
    would be a good idea and is one that I would have been willing
    to contribute to.
    
    Bonnie

re .11 and .14

    Laura, thanks so much for the time you took to type in those
    responses.  I appreciate the other point of view.  Since
    John's adoptive parents are the only parents he's ever known,
    and his birth parents had relatively less influence on the
    person he is today, it seemed "logical" to me that he would
    have little interest in searching for his birth parents.

    One thing you said really struck home for me, however:  how
    non-adoptees grow up taking for granted phrases like "oh,
    you're going to have cousin Sara's height" and "you're
    personality's more like your mom but you look more like your
    dad" and so forth.  I hadn't thought about it before, but I
    would hazard a guess that many little cues like this may help
    bond a child more firmly to the family network, creating a
    stronger sense of belonging.  I begin to have a glimmering of
    why some people want to find their biological parents and
    family, even with the potential disappointment that they may
    turn out not to have much in common other than genes.  Thanks
    for taking the time to teach me.

re .21
>   when the article will say "Johnny was the  Smiths adopted child,
>   the Smiths also have 3 children of their own."

    Gaah!  How insensitive can they be?!

    -- Linda

Thank you Laura for starting this discussion about adoption. As an 
adoptive parent, I hope to learn insights about my role in the 
adoption triangle.

Re: Second choice:

I did not consider that adopting a child was 'second choice'. Perhaps
one would consider giving birth to a child the 'easier choice'?

When my ex-husband and I decided to have a family we expected to go
about it in the 'usual' way - by giving birth to a child. But in the
back of my mind I was aware of children who, for whatever reason, 
were in need of families. I think even as a young girl I thought of 
adopting a child. When infertility problems were uncovered, doctors
offered 'extraodinary means' to try to conceive. I looked upon the
infertility as God's hint that S/he had other plans for my family and 
therefore we declined further treatments and proceeded with adoption.

Re: Adoption process:

Here's a quick summary. My experience was 11-12 years ago, but in
general -
 
It probably varies from family to family depending on the means they 
chose. In my family's case, we applied to an international agency. 
There was a two year wait for the first child and one year for the 
second. Preparation involves a home study, immigration paper work, 
and mostly waiting. Once the child arrives, there are post placement 
visits from the social worker, finalization of the adoption in the 
state, and US Naturalization.

Re: My own growth and development;

From the perspective of an adoptive parent, I can see that my family 
will go through stages. From the start I knew that an international/
bi-racial adoption would not be easy. That there would be some 
difficult times. But to tell you the truth, it has been easy until 
recently. I did not find it difficult to deal with the attention my 
family received in public when the kids were little, and still don't.
But I *have* experienced pain when I see them hurt by their peers' 
insensitivity.

My kids are pre-teens at 12 and 11 years old, this brings us to the next 
stage, I believe. They have thoughts that are difficult for them to
express, questions, feelings... Because *I* have (accepted/resolved/
assimilated...whatever the right word is) their adoption, I need to 
understand that they have yet to do that. I'm sure the stories of 'when 
I came home...' will help, but it seems I'm/we're getting into a much 
deeper need to understand and accept at this stage.

In trying to prepare myself for this stage, I am looking at what I 
am feeling, how can I improve my communications with the kids, etc. 
I have had some conversations with others which have helped. As 
one of my friends said, you cannot always 'make everything all right'
for your kids. The kids' feelings about being adopted and how they
incorporate it into their lives is something I wish I could 'make
right' for them.

Laura and others have suggested being open, receptive to opportunities
to talk about how they feel. Verbal communication does not come easily 
to me, but I am working on improving my skills. I am not afraid of my 
kids searching or of their questions about their birth parents. My 
difficulty is that I have no answers.

    This topic is very complex and personal. I'm sure I'll have more to
    say as time goes on and I hope I can make a worthwhile contribution.
    Thanks to all who have and will share their thoughts and feelings.

Nancy  

    I would like to start off by saying that I am in no way directing
    these comments at any contributor in this file and appoligize in
    advance if they offend you. But I wanted to contribute to this note
    but my contribution is much different then from I've read so far.
    
    <Flames On>
    I turn red with anger everytime I hear someone talk about adoptees
    being special or chosen. I was only a few month old when my parents
    got me. My sister was also adopted a few years before me (we're
    not related by blood either). There was nothing "special" about
    the way our parents treated us. 
    
    As an adult it is my belief that if God did not bless you with children
    then He's probably trying to send you a message, Don't have them.
    I've seen so many stories about couples that are going through
    extraordinary means to conceive. I just listen quietly because I
    know my opinion would never be understood. I can sympathize with
    them but I also think that they get so wraped up in the process that
    they loose sight of why they started the process to begin with. Having
    a child becomes a mission to them. 
    
    I say this because I believe (as does my sister) that our parents
    should never have had children. Period. Because they could not have
    them naturally they opted for adoption. But I think it was only
    because having children was "the thing to do" at the time.
    
    This is only my jaded opinion of adoption, from a person who's mother
    used to threaten to send her back where she came from (because she
    didn't *have* to keep me) quite seriously.
<Flames Off>
  
    re. .14 
    
    I think many of the issues you touched on concerning nationality
    etc. have got to be issues for all adoptees who do not have this
    information. In my case it has always been my friends that are more
    interested in my roots than I was. My current SO is simply fascinated
    with the idea that I may siblings out there. His interest has sparked
    some curiosity in me but not enough to do anything about it. 
    
    The way I feel, the last thing I want to do is find yet another Mother
    that is not interested in my being in her life. I don't believe
    in fairytale reunions. All I know that is every time my birthday
    comes around I know there is at least one other person thinking of
    it...  

    I think I'll stick around this topic, I have plenty to read,think and
    talk about.
    
    Gail
    

    Gail,
    
    I cringed as I read your note, and the comments, which I shall
    not repeat, made by your mother.  I guess that I am fortunate
    that I can not know what hearing such words must do to a child.
    
    It reminds me of the commitment involved in being a parent, however
    difficult the going gets.  When Tracy was 6 weeks old, she was
    acutely ill for about 24 hours, and the doctors told us that it
    was likely have permanent effects on her physically and possibly
    mentally.  They suggested that we NOT continue with the adoption!!!
    I (rather harshly) told them that she was part of our family and
    we were going to to our best, etc., for her.  We would no more
    consider discontinuing the adoption than we would consider placing
    for adoption a non-adopted child who got sick!  We were very lucky;
    she had no residual effects, but if she had, we would have figured
    out how to best deal with them.
    
    I think that I must agree with you that your parents weren't meant
    to be parents...based upon the way they treated you, even if that
    was only infrequent.  For something like that, once is too much!
                                   
    I'm sure that my (and others') concern is trivial compared with
    the pain you have experienced, but nevertheless, I am sorry that
    you had to go through that...
                                  P

       Just a word about adopting children from other countries. Mother
       Jones magazine just recently had an article about children being
       adopted, in this case specifically from South America. It seems
       that a large number of them have been taken from their birth
       parents by force. I've heard this also in connection with children
       from Asia. Please check carefully when you work with adoption
       lawyers and foreign agencys and if you are suspicious report
       them. liesl

    re: .26
    
    Gail,
    
    I believe there is a lot of anger to work through when dealing with
    these adoptions issues.  This is true, even in adoptions where the
    parents were 'capable' parents (for lack of better word at the moment).
    
    In your case, it seems your parents never really resolved their
    issues about being adoptive parents, rather than having children
    via non-adoption means.  
    
    I know of so many adoptees who heard that b.s. from parents about...if
    you're not good we'll just send you back...
    
    And I also identify with you around the heroic issues of conception,
    that I begin to questions what it is that these people really want.
    
    I think that it is important to face our anger and get to the other
    side of it.  It gives us our freedom.  I don't deal with my own
    anger except for one thing, and that is to make me feel better.
    So hang in here and keep talking and feeling.
    
    Regards,
    
    Laura
    

    I would like to respond to the terminology issue raised by Pennie
    and Bonnie and the thinking of adoption issue raised by Ren...
    
    
    Well, what IS the proper term.  We don't really have language in
    our vocabulary that does work for this situation.
    
    And I feel the same way as Bonnie does about the ghastly obits where
    adoptees are slintered off from the 'other' children...perhaps the
    'real' children vs. the 'unreal' children.
    
    I think the problem with the vocabulary stems from the fact that
    adoptees do get to their families via very different means than
    a child born into a family.  BTW, did any one read the Greg Louganis
    story in this Sunday's paper?  Being an adoptee is 'different' and
    a big deal in this society.  My God, the kid turned out successful
    even tho he's an adoptee!
    
    Anyway...in one case, a child is conceived, mom and dad deal with
    the 9 months or so of pregnancy, then childbirth and then in a few
    days mother and infant go home and live happily ever after, in theory.
    
    For the adoptee, getting to one's family is dramatically different.
    
    I have done some research during the weekend and have put together
    a few quotes from Linda Cannon Burgess' book to illustrate my point
    as to why adoptees may feel strange at times, and why adoptive parents
    may not feel the same as those who become parents thru the birth
    experience.
    
    "All adoptive applicants are nervous and scared at the prospect
    of an investigation of their lives.  There is an art to interviewing,
    the most important element of which is to listen. Following the
    interviews and a visit to the home, reference letters from the
    applicant's family, friends and employers complete the home study.
    Afer a review of the findings a couple was either accepted for the
    placement of a child in adoption or rejected and free to apply
    elsewhere."
    
    Sounds a bit different than the first scenario of getting pregnant
    and then giving birth.
    
    And then Burgess writes...
    
    "Raising adopted children is not an ordinary task and not every
    couple can handle it well.  So choices must be made.  Subjectively
    speaking I sought parents who showed enthusiasm, stability, tolerance
    and, most of all, ability to grow.  I viewed as negative
    characteristics tension is their relationships, rigidity, immaturity,
    sexual incompatibility, and indecisiveness in commitment to adoption."
    
    With all the power that the adoption social worker holds, and with
    all the hoops that adoptive parents must jump through, it is little
    surprise to me that we do not have language that addresses the basic
    issues--how do we refer to adopted children and adoptive
    parents/families?
    
    And now, to head off into another direction...the issue that Ren
    raised about feelings around search, I will again quote Burgess...
    
    "Most adoptive parents are puzzled and alone in dealing with questions
    of adoption as they arise.  They receive little help from other
    parents or from social workers, psychologists or psychiatrists,
    the majority of whom still acknowledge no intrinsic problems in
    the adoption situation.  From the early reassurance that the adopted
    baby is the same as if born to them, the parents slowly recognize
    the added dimension that the status of adoption creates.   For implicit
    in adoption are some undeniable facts: birth by another, illegitimacy,
    secretiveness, mystery, social stigma and genetic amputation.  
    
    Can these elements in adoption be ignored?  I think not, for adoption
    raises conflicts of identity and loyalty in adopted individuals
    and, for their adopters, a unique challenge to parenthood."
    
    This is just some food for thought.  Like Pennie, this clearly will
    be a note in which I reply to the most of all notes in this file.
    
    And finally, there is an article written by Marie MacLaren, an adoptive
    parent, which I will be transferring into this note file as soon
    as possible.  She addresses the issue of her adopted children searching
    for their birthmothers, and the article was so powerful it just
    about blew me into emotional orbit.  So stay tuned and get out your
    handkerchiefs, because you're going to need them getting through
    Marie's article.
    

    Marie MacLaren is an active member of the Adoption Connection (a
    search and support group based in Peabody, MA) and is also the
    legislative liason.  
    
    
    This article first appeared in the May 1988 issue of Women's Household,
    and was subsequently reprinted in the September 1988 Adoption
    Connection newsletter.
    
    Marie is an important figure in my life because as an adoptive parent,
    she helped me to understand where my parents were coming from. 
    
    Marie is very involved with the Adoption Connection and represents
    the organization as a spokesperson and public speaker.
    
    
    
    
    
         WHEN FANTASY AND REALITY MEET  by Marie MacLaren


Richard leaned his head against my stomach, patted it gently with his hand 
and asked, "I grew in your tummy, didn't I Mommy?"  He was five years old.  
This was the first time we talked about what being adopted really meant.

I searched for the right words and began to tell him about "another lady" 
who "grew" him in her tummy--a lady who couldn't be his mother.  Then I 
told him how much Daddy and I had wanted children and how happy it made us 
to have him and his little sister Allie.

I had chosen the words "another lady" so carefully.  While I told myself 
the idea of having two mothers would confuse him, I suspect I wasn't ready 
to share my claim to "Mother."

What I didn't tell him was there never could be a baby in my tummy. At one 
time, that had been very painful for me.  That's why the day the call came 
from the adoption agency became the most important day of our lives!  "The 
child we have to offer you is slightly older.  He'll be 2 in June.  His 
name is Richard," the social worker told us.

I was struggling to picture myself suddenly becoming the mother of a 2 year 
old!  March 29, 1962, Ben and I drove home with our new son. I was worried 
because I didn't feel like a mother; I watched Ben looking comfortable in 
his new role.  However, as the weeks went by, I learned the meaning of the 
word "bonding."  One day we were simply strangers to each other; then we 
began to feel the warmth of familiarity and the discomfort of separation.  
Suddenly, his life was more important to me than mine--I became his "real" 
mother.

Within a year, another call came from the agency. This time it was about a 
baby daughter.  We named her Alison--Allie for short.  Now we had a perfect 
little family.

A couple of years after our first talk, Richard wanted to talk about the 
"other lady" again; this time, he was more direct.

"Why do you call her that lady, Mommy?  She was my mother, wasn't she?  So 
you think she is lonely without me?"  In his child's mind he understood 
being adopted meant being separated from another mother.

As Alison grew, she had her own questions.  "Why did my mother sell me?  
Was I really born or just adopted?  What did my mother look like?"

We quickly assured her her birth mother didn't sell her!  Beyond those 
facts, we had few answers. The only background information we were given by 
the agency was Richard was named by his birth mother and Alison was of 
Italian heritage.

In those days, social workers believed it was best not to know--a clean 
break with the past would get the new family off to a better start.  We 
didn't question the wisdom of this, but we became unsure. It made little 
sense to Rich and Allie we knew nothing about where they came from.

It was hard to explain why there were such secrets. Why did there have to 
be laws to protect them from their birth mothers?  It prompted some 
negative questions, "Would she come and take me away from you? Is she a bad 
person?"

Because they didn't have facts, fantasy became their next best thing.  
Alison created her own birth mother.  She was Annette Funicello who sang 
with Frankie Avalon and sold peanut butter in a TV commercial.  Richard's 
fantasies focused more on the reasons why he was given up for adoption.

Even in my own imagination, each birth mother came to life.  Richard's was 
a school teacher who wore a tweed suit.  There had been a love affair that 
ended tragically and Richard was born soon after.  She never got over the 
loss of her lover or the child they had together.  I think my fantasy was 
inspired by Richard's question, "Is she lonely without me?"  I always 
pictured Allie's birth mother as a sparly, young, high school cheerleader.

Sometimes I felt connected to them and other times I feared them.  Often 
months or even years passed with little or no discussion about adoption.  
There were times we hardly noticed it was part of our lives.

During Richard's adolescence, it all seemed to surface again.  He was 
struggling to form a sense of who he was--not such an easy thing to do when 
there's so much you don't know about yourself.

Sometime during Rich and Allie's high school years, the four of us sat up 
night after night with the rest of America watching Alex Haley's "Roots."

"If Alex Haley could find is roots in tribal Africa, why can't we find 
ours?" one of them asked. As I watched the drama unfold, I had no idea of 
the effect it would have on adoptees all over the country.  Ours was one of 
the many calls to adoption agencies.  It was time for Alison and Richard to 
find out something about their origins.

In June of 1978, 18-year-old Richard had an appointment with Miss Jones, a 
social worker who had been with our agency since he was placed with us. At 
first, he planned to go alone, but as the hour drew near he took us on our 
offer to go along for moral support.  It must be pretty scary to hear for 
the first time in your life about who you are and why you were given up.

That afternoon, Ben and I waited at the bottom of the stairs for Richard to 
be ready to leave.  We were all dressed up, still reacting to an old need 
to make a good impression at the adoption agency.  Rich came down the 
stairs, looking as if he didn't own a decent thing to wear--he had holes in 
the knees of his worn-out jeans and no socks under his old basketball 
sneakers, which were laced only half-way up.  Ben recognized the disguise 
was meant to hide the fact he was feeling very vulnerable, and hushed my 
demand for Richard to change.

"Your natural mother came here from New York not long before your birth," 
Miss Jones began.  "She was 27 years old and alone with three small 
children.  She worked as a waitress throughout her pregnancy in order to 
support the children and herself, but she had difficulty making child care 
arrangements. In her own words, they were living from 'pillar to post.'  In 
desparation, she turned to this agency to make an adoption plan for you."

Richard looked saddened by what he had just heard.  He lowered his head and 
said, "I guess I'm glad I was adopted."

I felt sad too and secretly said goodbye to the lonely teacher in the tweed 
the suit.

Miss Jones went on to describe her, "She was born somewhere in the south. 
She was an attractive brunette--well-spoken and practical."

Richard asked, "What is my nationality?  Who was my father?  What happened 
to my mother after I was born?"  But there were no answers to these 
questions.

He tried to convince her to tell him his mother's name.  She was 
sympathetic, but bound by laws of confidentiality.

Richard didn't talk much about his visit to the agency.  He seemed to want 
to put it all behind him.

A year or two later, he drove to Louisiana on a business trip for Ben and 
began to think about his birth mother again: "As I drove through each 
southern town, I wondered if I had roots there.  Mom, if I could afford to 
hire a private detective, I'd find her."

That week, a local TV talk show had a woman who coordinated 
search-and-support groups for adoptees as its guest.  She had helped 
hundreds of people find their birth families.  I called the phone number, 
and a six-month search began.  The search went nowhere until the day 
Richard learned his mother's name.  To find out where she had vanished to 
was yet another struggle, but with the name, Richard bridged the gap 
separating them.  The "other lady," his birth mother, could now be called 
Elsie.

We began with Miss Jones' assumption Elsie had returned to New York--New 
York City or New York State?  Miss Jones had carefully not specified.

We wrote letters, hoping to find records of a woman by that name, born in 
1933.  We scanned New York phone books and called dozens of numbers.  We 
came up with nothing.

I was the one who found the 1964 marriage record telling us she had not 
left our area, but married a local man.  A search for birth records showed 
she had two more children.

I found her husband's name in the phone book and dialed the number.  My 
voice caught in my throat as the phone rang.  A woman answered.

"Who am I speaking to?" I asked.
"This is Elsie," the voice answered.
"I am sorry, I have the wrong number," I lied and hung up the phone.  I 
felt uneasy.  I wondered if our lives would ever be the same as I thought 
about the fable, "Pandora's Box."

My news didn't have the effect on Richard I had expected.  I thought he 
would be excited, but he looked somber as he let it sink in.  He wondered 
how he would handle rejection if she didn't want to see him.

Then we thought about how a child given up long ago then unexpectedly 
reappearing might effect Elsie.

Alison listened with impatience.  "How can you just sit there?" she asked.  
"If she were my birth mother, I'd be peeking in her windows just to see 
someone who looks like me."

She too had returned to the agency to [Bhear about her own birth family.  Her 
story was more the typical one of the 60's.  Her birth mother was a young 
college student, unmarried and pregnant, who was supported by a warm, 
loving family.  Alison was delighted to learn her birth mother was a twin 
and her birth father was born in Italy.

Months went by.  The only connection with Elsie was the occasional detour 
each of us made to the street where she lived.  We scrutinized her house, 
the cat sleeping on the porch, her plants in the windows--anything which 
might give us a clue as to how she might receive contact from Richard.

One day in early 1981 as the American hostages were released from Iran, we 
saw our first hint of how this family felt about reunions--the front porch 
was decorated with yellow ribbons.

It was Ben who called her.  He stumbled through the first part of the 
conversation, trying not to give away too much at once.

"I am calling to speak to you about one of your sons."  She was silent.

"Does the name Richard mean anything to you?"  She was evasive, but allowed 
him to continue.

"I am the adopted father of a 20-year-old sone who would like to meet his 
birth mother."

"My God!" she called to her husband.  "This is the man who adopted my 
baby."

After that, the conversation was easier.  She told Ben she had always 
believed she would meet Richard.  They talked for a long time about her and 
Richard's lives.

Later that week, Ben and I stood at the window and watched our son leave to 
meet his other mother.  We knew we couldn't quite understand what it must 
be like to have never laid eyes on your own flesh and blood.

I felt vaguely ill at ease as I wondered about the bond of birth.  Would 
they recognize it?  Would he sense somthing he didn't feel with me?

He arrived home later that evening and held up a photograph as he 
announced, "These are my brothers and sisters!  Don't all our chins look 
alike?"  He went on to tell us about his ancestors who fought in the Civil 
War and his nationality which was "like Heinz 57 varieties."

"But what did you think of Elsie?" I asked immediately.

"Oh she was just fine, but Mom, it was weird, she seemed like a stranger."

I thought of the day Rich and I were strangers too.

I met Elsie for the first time in a pizza parlor.  We had spoken on the 
phone the evening Ben called her.  "Let's have lunch sometime," I had 
suggested.

I arrived early so she couldn't watch me walking in, looking apprehensive 
and uncertain.  She arrived as I sat fidgeting with snapshops of Richard 
growing up.  I knew her right away. She looked like Richard--the same 
thick, wavy hair, the same nose and chin.

Over a sub and a beer, we exchanged photographs and made a lot of small 
talk.  I asked about the yellow ribbons.

"My kids did that to welcome me home from the hospital after an operation," 
she explained.  I was impressed.

Then she told me about the day Richard was born and the dehumanizing 
treatment she received at the hospital.  She had labored in a corridor.  
There was no warmth or support for a woman who was going to give up her 
baby.  She held him only once.

"He wanted to nurse.  I had nursed my other children and everything in me 
needed to nurse this one, but if I did, how could I have let him go?"

I hurt for her and the newborn baby; I was struggling with brimming tears.

She changed the subject.  "It must have hurt like hell to be childless," 
she said.

"Yes, it did," I said and cried.

We were two women who had each suffered a loss.  Hers was her baby she 
couldn't keep; mine was the baby I couldn't have. I had thought I would 
thank her for my beautiful son, but it no longer seemed appropriate.

Weeks later, I was still sifting through emotions, when Alison, now 18 
years old, announced she was about to search for her birth mother.

"Mom, don't you know you'll always be my mother?" she said when my 
enthusiasm didn't meet her expectations.

Elsie has welcomed Richard, but would Allie be as fortunate?  I couldn't 
bear the possibility she would encounter rejection on the heels of her 
brother's success.  She seemed so young and I was emotionally drained.

Powered by a natural sense of optimism, Allie went ahead and handled 
things--she returned to the adoption agency again.  Miss Jones agreed to be 
an intermediary.  While not violating confidentiality, she would arrange a 
meeting if the birth mother agreed.

"Please try to understand if your birth mother isn't ready to resurrect the 
past--giving you up must have been very painful," I offered, attempting to 
insulate her from rejection if things didn't work out.

Happily, my advice wasn't needed--Allie and Betsy met a week later at the 
adoption agency.

That morning we waved good-bye and wished our daughter good luck.  She 
looked beautiful and confident.

I wondered if Betsy had big dark eyes like Allie's, flashing around when 
she laughed.  I wondered if they would fit into each other's clothes like 
my mother and I always did.

When she returned home, I was surprised she wasn't her usual, high-spirited 
self, spilling over with talk.

"Mom, I'm so exhausted!" she said rightaway.  "Why was I so surprised she 
isn't still 18 years old? She doesn't look like Annette Funicello!  I 
thought I would know her, but I didn't!  She's a lady in her 30's; her hair 
is starting to gray and she has five kids."

I began to understand this was not just a meeting of a mother and child, 
but of fantasy and reality as well.

Seven years have passed.  The changes are welcome.  Our children now have 
complete histories to pass on.

I marvel at the strong bond of the adoptive family.  We have not changed.  
Another dimension has been added--a new, extended family.

I am touched by the way Elsie and Betsy have honored my bond with Rich and 
Allie.  I am their mother, but understand I cannot intrude on the bond 
created when a woman gives birth.

People often say it takes more than birthing to be a "real" mother; "real" 
mothers are there through the years.  Maybe so, but does a mother cease to 
exist because she signs an adoption surrender?  Does a woman who is no 
longer a mother come forward, perhaps at great personal risk, when the 
child she gave up long ago reached out?

I believe each of us is a real mother.


   

    Thanks Laura,
    
    I'm a bit wet around the eyes right now. Do you mind if I print
    that out to give to my kids to read?
    
    Bonnie

    re: .32
    
    
    Yeah, print it, Bonnie, print it!
    

re .31

    Oh, Laura, thank you.

    -- Linda

             
            
    This article appeared in the August, 1988 issue of Sojourner.  I
    am entering it here because it represents another facet and a timely
    issue concerning, not necessarily adoption, but certainly the issues
    of identity and people's need to know who we are and where we've
    come from. 
    
    As an adoptee who is also a lesbian, it is an issue that is near to my
    heart and has caused great pain at times.  It is a timely issue
    because many single women (not just lesbians as Maryellen points
    out) are having children via anonymous donar insemination.
    
    It is reprinted here without permission, although Maryellen is my
    buddy and I know she wouldn't mind...
    
    
             A CHILD'S RIGHT TO KNOW  by Maryellen Butke
    
    
    Last January I attended the Children in Our Lives conference in
    Boston.  The conference turnout was impressive, and clearly the
    organizers put a considerable amount of time, effort and dedication
    into making the event a success.  The organizers also attempted
    to represent the diversity of our community.
    
    Unfortunately, the conference failed to address, discuss, and debate
    an extremely important issue related to those children whom we parent
    (or may someday parent)--that is, how we "choose" our children.
    Specifically, I'm referring to anonymous insemination and closed
    adoption.  I am writing as an adoptee, as a social worker treating
    adopted children and their families, and as a lesbian who is interested
    in raising children at some point in my life.  I am writing as a
    way to begin this dialogue in our community.
    
    I am deeply troubled when I hear of more and more lesbians (and
    heterosexual women) who are creating their babies by anonymous
    insemination.  It saddens me to think that these children will have
    no access to 50 percent of their roots and heritage.  Unlike adoption,
    where records are sealed, most of the records involving anonymous
    insemination are not kept after several months' duration.  Usually,
    there is no way to trace the donor.  It seems as if we, as lesbian
    parents, have become so terrified of losing our children through
    custody battles that we've focused only on our rights to have and
    raise children.  But what about the rights of the children?  Currently,
    there has been little written about the effects of anonymous
    insemination on children.  But indeed, those children will want
    to know, just as adoptees yearn to know our heritage and our
    background.
    
    Unfortunately, the panels I attended addressed this issue in an
    insensitive and seemingly naive way.  During the first large workshop
    of the conference, on Considering Motherhood, there were two panel
    members who had both chosen to have children bia anonymous donor
    insemination.  Both women stated that this choice was the "easiest"
    one available, and one of the women stated that it would be "too
    complicated" to try and involve a man (the child's father) in her
    life.  The last woman who spoke discussed some of the difficulties
    of being a lesbian mother and having a child through anonymous
    insemination.   She stated that one difficulty she has confronted
    is being in the park and having a stranger say, "Your child is so
    beautiful; does she look like her father?"  This line was spoken
    in jest, and got quite a laugh from the women attending the conference.
    As an adoptee who has never seen anyone to whom I am related, this
    line was far from "funny."  My response, instead, was to cry and
    to wonder where our concern was for those children who are so dear
    to us?  What about that child whom you love and cherish?  What will
    you do when that child turns back to you and asks, "who is my father?"
    
    Many women at the conference discussed their "choice" to have children
    and having the "freedom" to bear children.  This concept is ironic
    to an adoptee.  My "freedom" to know the basic facts of my
    existence--my birth name; my birthparents' names; whether I have
    brothers or sisters, my social, medical, and emotional history--has
    been denied me, "sealed off" by the courts through no choice of
    my own.
    
    In addition, I attended the panel on Adopting Children.  The room
    was packed--at least 50 or 60 women were there--and only two of
    us ever mentioned the importance of the birthparents in the lives
    of these children or these children's basic right to know the facts
    of their lives.  All the other women who spoke seemed interested
    in one thing only, "How can we get a child?"  No questions were
    asked about the parents who bore these children, or why these children
    are being placed for adoption.  No one asked, how should we go about
    creating an open adoption so that our child will have access to
    his/her heritage?
    
    Has anyone noticed the conspiracy against being a single, pregnant
    woman?  There's not a huge support network out there, and single,
    pregnant women do not possess a whole lot of earning power.  Has
    anyone seen the movies The Official Story or Madres de la Plaza,
    which portray mothers who have lost children through kidnaping,
    never to see them again?  Closed adoption sets up the same tragedy.
    The mother--whether she be from the United States, Central America,
    or India--loses that child and, most often, never has access to
    that child again.  How can we consent to one of the systems most
    oppressive to women?  Where have our politics gone?
    
    In regards to our children's psychological health, this need to
    know who we are does not go away.  The literature on adoption abounds
    with stories of adoptees who feel a sense of alienation and isolation
    from the rest of the human race.  Questions of "who am I? who do
    I look like? what is my birth name? why was I given up? how come
    I will never know who my father is? are frequently asked.  Even
    with caring, nurturing adoptive parents (or mothers who have born
    children through anonymous insemination), these feelings still run
    rampant.
    
    We, as lesbians, as feminists, need to take up this challenge, to
    address these issues in our community.  If you plan to adopt,
    acknowledge that birthparents have a life-long connection to that
    child, as that child does to them.  The child does have an extended
    family: aunts and uncles, grandparents, and siblings.  Find a way
    to know who those people are, form cooperative "open" adoptions,
    correspond with the birthfamily.  Closed adoption is based on a
    system of lies and denial, something that hopefully none of us would
    choose for our children.
    
    If you do plan to adopt a child from another country, push the agency
    to locate the birthparents prior to the adoption and obtain as much
    information as possible about that child's family.  If the agency
    refuses to do this, find another agency.
    
    In regards to anonymous insemination, please think long and hard
    about your choices.  It is possible to request a known donor, where
    the donor agrees to have his name disclosed to the child at the
    age of majority.  It may even be possible to go back and try to
    locate the donor's identity so that your child will have the choice
    about whether s/he wants a relationship with her/his birthfather.
    
    Our community works long and hard to make good choices, both for
    ourselves and our children.  We can take the lead in bringing these
    issues out of the closet.
    
    -------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    Maryellen Butke is a psychiatric social worker searching for her
    birthparents.
               

    You all might be interested to know what happened when I printed
    out the note by the adoptive mother and brought it home tonite.
    
    I picked up my daughter at the library and offered it to her. She
    said she wasn't interested. So I offered it also to my son and
    he said the same thing. I protested that they were turning it down
    just because it came from mom, and they tend to reject articles
    and info that I give them (at 15 and 16), (may I add here that
    my 11 and my 19 year olds are quite willing to look at stuff that
    I find that interests them...and the other two used to...it is the
    age!).
    
    Well at the end of dinner tonite I pulled the article out and said
    that I wanted to read it. At the table were my husband, my 16 year
    old and 14 year old son and my 11 year old dauther (my other daughter
    had gone to her room and our oldest is in college). I read the whole
    thing from beginning to end, without *one* interuption...well, Peter
    the 16 year old clowned a bit with a napkin, but all three kids
    listened intently! At the end Don and I had tears in our eyes when
    I read the line about all mothers are real mothers, and I said I
    felt that was really true.
    
    So then Peter comes in, as only a 16 year old can, that he didn't
    believe me, because I had made so much about my being his 'real'
    mother when he was growing up. I did respond, and I don't know if
    he 'heard' it...that my emphasis on that, was to counter what used
    to be a problem with adoptive kids. In the past, and even today,
    adoptive parents weren't considered to be 'real' parents, especially
    by uninformed adults or teasing children. So, in trying to solve
    (and apparently solving) one problem, another one arises! Tho I
    really think a lot of that was just Peter, that he was touched and
    didn't want to admit that he was.
    
    Anyway, I think that the experience of reading that was a very positive
    one...and I hope to see some good things grow out of it in the future.
    
    Bonnie
    
    

    Note:  The Adoption Connection is the organization that helped me
    do my search.  I have continued my membership with this organization
    even though my 'official' search is completed.  I still attend the
    monthly support group meetings because I feel that there is so much
    I can still learn or need to process.
    
    
    A few years ago, prior to meeting my birth families, I was asked
    by Susan Darke (director of the Adoption Connection) to write an
    article for the monthly newsletter.
    
    As I look back on this article written three years ago with my
    perspective of today, I realize that the issue of fear of rejection
    within reunions is as timely as it ever was.
    
    Fear of rejection can be applied in global terms, the various 'what
    if' scenarios, when an adoptee or birth mother/father searches for
    the lost family member.
    
    There are so many reasons why we fear that the 'other' person might
    reject us (other than the issues specifically addressed in my article).
    And although the 'rejection' stories are almost always the kinds
    of stories we read about in the Dear Abby and Ann Landers columns,
    the reality is that so many more of the reunions are very positive
    experiences.
    
    
                  FACING THE FEAR OF REJECTION  written October, 1985
    
    
    I am a 30 year old adoptee who is in the process of searching for
    my birth mother.  I am a lesbian.  I am an alcoholic, sober for
    the past three and one half years in a program of recovery.
    
    As I move closer to finding my birth mother my thoughts focus on
    the 'what if's.'  I realize that the fear of rejection is a major
    theme in the litany of the 'what if's.' 
    
    The process of 'coming out,' as a lesbian and then later on as an
    alcoholic, has spanned most of my adult years.  I am not without
    scars from rejection by people who could not or would not accept
    me as I am.  For the most part, my parents and relatives have been
    tolerant of me and of my life partner.  Most of my 'straight' friends
    have continued to offer their love, support and acceptance, but
    others have responded with hostility, fear and anger.  Included
    in the latter group is my older sister who is also an adoptee.
    
    And so, when presented with this new possibility--the possibility
    that I may soon meet my birth mother, I wonder what level of risk
    do I take in revealing myself to her?  At the heart of this question
    is the fear of rejection.
    
    This question brought me to the offices of The Adoption Connection
    for an appointment with Susan to discuss my fears.  I find it easier
    to start with what I consider 'lesser risks,' and telling Susan
    about myself seemed to be a safe way to begin.  This article for
    the newsletter is an off-shoot of that meeting.
    
    It is very helpful to be reminded that most people do not run off
    screaming when they learn that my 'significant other' is a woman
    or that I drank myself sick almost every day and was inconsistent
    while I was an active alcoholic.  It is also helpful to hear again,
    form another person's perspective, that I am not alone in my fears.
    
    Susan was able to explain to me that most birth mothers were fed
    the myth that if their babies went to other homes then they would
    have these perfect lives, immune to the struggles and disappointments
    of daily living.  The reality is that every person at some point
    in life, is faced with painful experiences, disappointments, and
    soul-searching decisions to make.  Perhaps, as Susan suggested,
    it is easier for both birth mother and her adult child to reveal
    ourselves slowly, saving the painful experiences for a time when
    a mutual relationship has been established.
    
    It is painful to grow up in an alcoholic family system, to begin
    drinking at the age of 13, and to know that because I am a lesbian
    some people will reject me.  It seems that in the midst of the
    uncertainty, drama, anxiety and excitement of this search process
    I have forgotten a very important fact about myself...I am a survivor.
    I have a strong network of support in my life, and I can increase
    that network to meet these new needs arising from my search process.
    
    All of us who are searching for our birth mothers/children are
    survivors.  We live from day to day with uncertainty, the kind that
    we've lived with since the day of separation.  To keep moving forward
    when we know that there are no guarantees on the outcomes of our
    searching means that we are strong, and that no matter what happens,
    we can emerge from this process as healthy and whole adults.
    
    As I sit here writing this article, I can say that even if I never
    have the opportunity to meet my birth mother, I know more about
    her and myself than I ever thought could be possible.  I have a
    renewed and changed sense of myself, I have 'roots' and a history
    that, for 30 years, was systematically withheld from me.
    
    I am grateful that organizations like The Adoption Connection exist.
    Finding this network has been the single most important factor for
    breaking the silence about my experiences as an adoptee and being
    able to believe, REALLY believe, that it is quite alright to search
    for my birth mother.
    

    re: 36
    
    Well you're certainly brave, Bonnie.  I don't think I could get
    through a public reading of that article in front of my family!
    
    I admire your persistence in getting the word out to your children.
    It will be interesting to see if the story sparks discussions later
    on down the road when they've had time to think about it and process
    some of the information privately.
    
    Yeah, it used to drive me nuts when my Mom would pick out things
    for me to read...although I probably would have read them if she
    had been giving me articles like that one instead of the ones about
    how to dress right and talk right and walk right!
    
    So keep us posted if the subject gets revisited by any of your kids.
    
    Regards,
    
    Laura
    

                        

    Well, I've transferred this from another file, and realize that
    the length of this is totally out of hand.  However, I know that
    you noters will bear with my verbosity...read at your leisure or
    hit next unseen is 5 billion lines seems totally unmanageable.
    
    If you can believe it...this is the Reader's Digest condensed version!
    
                       #######################
    
    
    

I am presenting my story as it happened by using exerpts from my journal 
that I kept during my search and then letters I have written or received 
from new found family members.


 
July 22, 1985

I remember how I would stare hard into the mirror trying to make sense of 
the face reflected back at me.  I tried to imagine what my birth mother 
looked like,  I would remember as I stared all the stories I had made up in 
childhood to explain why I was living with a different family than the one 
I was born into.

My response to these stories is anger; anger that I had to make up my 
history; anger at the messages that it would never be alright to ask for 
the truth.

I gave my birth mother a name, a personality and a nationality.  I made her 
into a very real person and then I killed her.

My story for being adopted was that my birth mother had died in childbirth. 
She had to.  Mothers don't give away their babies.

When I was around 7 years old I asked my mother if she had any information 
about where I came from.  Her response was something like, "We didn't want 
to know so we didn't ask."  Loosely translated to a child of 7:  "Don't ask 
any questions."  I never asked again.

I sometimes wonder if I'll ever get past the guilt and feelings of betrayal 
of my parents for wanting to know where I've come from.

I grew up with an older sister, also adopted, who pretended that she was 
not adopted.  It was not alright to talk about adoption with her either.

Because of guilt or fear or I don't know what, I've been trying to side 
step these adoption issues.  It isn't working anymore.  I need to search 
for Laura; all the pieces of me.  I do not know where I am headed, but I am 
no longer afraid to know what is at the other side of denial.  When I reach 
that place I will find truth.



July 24, 1985

Call Adoption Connection
     11 Peabody Square
     Peabody, MA
     532-1261

Am I ready to participate in a support group for adoptees?  I don't even 
know if they exist, but I can at least get some information.

Questions for Adoption Connection:

1. Did they used to be named Orphan Voyage?
2. What types of services do they provide? At what cost?
3. Do they have information about support groups?
4. Do they have information about birth parents organizations?
5. What can I expect to happen during this process?
6. Do most people inform their adoptive parents about their search?


July 25, 1985

Called Adoption Connection.  Talked with Susan Darke (adoptee & birth 
mother), Director of the agency.  She says that because I was born in 
Massachusetts but adopted in Connecticut there is a possibility that my 
birth mother may live in Ct.

Adoption Connection services are: National & Internation cross-reference 
reunion registration, monthly newsletter and monthly support meetings.

I will be informed as each piece of information is obtained by Adoption 
Connection.  First step is to get the name of my birth mother.  Can make an 
appointment to go see Susan in Peabody.

It is really starting to sink in that I have made the first move in getting 
information about my birth mother.  I like to think that I am very good at 
staying in the moment--one day at a time, etc., but I find myself doing 
some projecting around the issue.  What if I have an opportunity to meet my 
birth mother: do I tell her I'm a lesbian? A recovering alcoholic?  I have 
already lost some of my family over these issues, I fear the risk of 
further rejection.  Like the line from Margie Adam's song, "How many ways 
must I lose you, how many times must I cry..."

And then I think, well my birth mother could be a lesbian or a recovering 
alcoholic and that the person I am is o.k. and will be o.k. in her eyes.  I 
know I can drive myself crazy with speculation so I must try even harder to 
stay in today.

I haven't been this wired in a long time.  How to be patient?  How to keep 
myself from wanting it all right now? How the hell will I sleep tonight?


September 15, 1985

Went to the Adoption Connection meeting today.  Emotional overload.  Woman 
were there with birth mothers found.  There are adoptive parents who 
support their children's need to know.

I am jealous of those who have searched and found.  I want what they have.  
I have no patience for this waiting process.


October 2, 1985

Anne Therese Trahan.  This is my original name.  Susan Darke told me this 
today.  In my mind I knew that I had a different name at birth and I've 
known this for a while.  Intellectually it all fits, but now, the emotional 
reaction begins.

I know the name I was given at birth.

Up until this time it has all been theory and speculation.  I have 
feelings, lots of them, all mixed up together.  There are never pure 
feelings that are easily identified.  They always merge and intertwine.  
That's how it's been since the beginning of this process.

                   ****************************


On October 28, 1985, I made a list of everything I knew about myself and my 
family of origin.  Most of the information I had pieced together from the 
city and town directories that I had poured through one day in the Meriden 
public library.  The rest of the information I either got from my 
non-identifying information from the adoption agency or from Susan Darke.


Mother's name:  Anita Estelle, daughter of Alida and Arthur.  Our ethnic
                background is French.

Anita was 22 years old when she gave birth to me.  She graduated from 
Meriden High School and was working for International Silver Co. as a press 
operator.

In 1952, Alida (Anita's mother) disappeared from the city/town directory.
I am assuming that she died.  It was at that time that Anita moved into her 
own apartment.

In 1954, Arthur married Phoebe.  They stayed in Meriden until 1980, both 
retired from work in 1967.  Anita disappeared from the city/town directory 
in 1957. I am assuming she got married and changed her name or just moved 
out of the area.

Other research that proved fruitful...Anita graduated from the Meriden High 
School.  The public library had back copies.  I found Anita's high school 
senior year picture in the yearbook.

My reaction:  My sense of self has been rearranged instantly.  Her high 
school picture is priceless to me.  When I look in the mirror while 
brushing my teeth or putting in my contact lenses, the face looking back at 
me has a connection and context it never before has had.  I LOOK LIKE MY 
MOTHER.  And I am blown away by this fact.  This is the first time in 30 
years that I have ever looked like anyone else that is considered a 
relative.  I never looked like my sister, parents, aunts, uncles or 
cousins, but even though it was logical why I wouldn't look like any of 
them, it was a somewhat alienating and isolating experience.

And so I wait while Susan attempts to make contact with these people in 
Waterbury (my grandparents, in order to get a current address for Anita).  
I hang by the phone waiting for it to ring.  It is not happening fast 
enough.  After all, I talked with Susan at 10 this morning and it is now 
2:30.  Shouldn't she have gotten through to them by now?

If I don't drive myself crazy I may make it through this process in one 
piece.  It helps to write about all that is happening because sometimes I 
think that maybe this isn't real.  I'll wake up and find that I was just 
dreaming all this.

I hope to meet Anita soon.  I can't  think of much else at this time in my 
life.  I can't concentrate of sleep, I have high anxiety and a wall of 
impatience that won't quit.  I feel so close to finding her now that I am 
certain that something will go wrong.  It seems that this information has 
come too easily, doesn't that always mean that something has to go wrong?

The possibility of meeting her raises a whole other set of fears; fears of 
rejection, fears that she won't like me as a person, or that I won't like 
her, or that she won't want to meet me or have anything to do with me.  And 
what is all comes doen to is that I really want her to like me and to love 
me.  For Laura at age 30 and for Anita at age 52, there are no guarantees.


And from my journal entry on October 28, 1985

I can't sleep at night.  I sleep for a little bit and then I wake up.  All 
my dreams connect to her; to anticipated reunion.  I eake up from these 
dreams feeling sad and afraid. So much to risk now; to come this far and to 
not know if Anita is still living, and if she is, will she want to meet me.

Things are happening so fast, and yet I want it to go faster.  I am 
constantly on high gear and the rest of the world should be that way too.  
I look at the picture of a young woman at 18; now she is 52.

Maybe Anita will feel that I'm really an o.k. person and she will grow to 
like me or even love me.  What do I want from this woman?  What are my 
motives?  Do I have expectations that she may not want to meet or can't 
meet?

Already I am so grateful to know as much as I do, to have this high school 
yearbook picture, to know that I indeed look like her.  I have a feeling of 
being connected in this world in a way I've never felt before.


                       ***************************

It took me some time to process 'the phone call' from Susan Darke, the 
phone call telling me about the contact with my grandparents, the phone 
call that would give me a current address on Anita.  Because that phone 
call was so emotionally loaded, it took me time to process it and I was 
able to write about it, in retrospect, a couple of years later...


The day is somewhat of a blur to me now. For some reason I had stayed home 
from work.  I can't remember if I was sick or just exhausted and worn out 
from waiting.  I had been waiting for two weeks for Susan to make contact 
with my birth mother's parents so we could get a current address and phone 
number for Anita.

Although I wasn't 100% sure that the number I had given Susan was the right 
people, it was as sure as it was going to get in this process of piecing 
together the puzzle.

I had given the phone number to Susan on October 28th and the wait began.  
I did no work on the job because I couldn't concentrate.  I slept in fits 
and starts, never getting rested because I would wake up with nightmares, 
or I just couldn't shut my mind off enough to sleep.

I had visions and images of our reunion, me and Anita. I imagined how it 
would beel to have her hold me, to touch her, to look into each others eyes 
and know that I had found my way home.

I called Susan at 3:00 on that Friday afternoon.  I was sitting in bed 
having been there for most of the day.  Susan didn't sound like her usual 
self, but maybe it was because she had had laryngitis during the past week. 
I tried to calm myself.

She began, "I have good news and bad news."

My mind began to race and the thoughts came like bullets fired into my 
brain, "she doesn't want to see me or know me, she's..."

Susan said, "The good news is the phone number you gave me is the correct 
Trahans," she paused, then proceeded, "the bad news is that..."

I interrupted Susan as the words came out of my mouth against my will, "my 
birth mother is no longer living..."

Deadly silence.  The room was spinning.  I could hear Susan's voice, but I 
had no idea what she was saying to me.  I remember fragments of her words, 
"...it will hurt...abandoned for a second time...angry...disappointed..."

I began to cry and Susan said, "You will need to cry and grieve this loss. 
It's o.k. to have these feelings."

"Loss, loss," I thought to myself, "how do you lose someone you've never 
had? How do you grieve for someone you've never known?"

In an effort to continue the conversation with Susan I shut off my feelings 
and asked her for all the information she had received.

"When did Anita die?"

"Well, Phoebe has a heavy accent, but I think she said the year was 1977."

"How did she die?"

"I'm not really clear, something about falling down the stairs and then she 
had a cerebral hemorrhage."

Alcoholism.  The thought cut through my brain.

Susan continued.  "We did find out that Anita married a few years after you 
were born and had two more children.  Her husband's name is Joe D. and he 
remarried about a year after Anita died.  He has two more children from his 
second marriage."

My thoughts raced again, "Siblings...sisters, brothers, how old, will they 
like me?  Will I like them.  I'm an older sister for the first time in my 
life."

Susan told me that I had an aunt, Anita's sister, who was a Sister of 
Mercy.  And so, for the first time in my life I had the name and address of 
a blood relative.  My aunt.  My birth mother's older sister.

Susan and I ended our conversation with my promise to call her within the 
week to let her know how I was doing.

When I hung up the phone my tears began flowing.  I believed in that moment 
that those tears would flow for the rest of my life.  It was going to be a 
short life.  I would simply drown in my tears rather than live with this 
pain. 

                       ****************

And from my journal entries.

November 8, 1985

Anita Trahan is dead.  She died in 1971.  A cerebral hemorrhage.  I feel 
empty, angry and lost.


November 10, 1985

I have had dreams about what our reunion would have been like.  We would 
take pictures of each other, bring old pictures to share.  We would talk 
for days and days to make up for lost time.  I had composed letters in my 
head to Anita telling her that I didn't blame her for how things turned 
out.

I sat in the bath tup for along time yesterday and cried.  Then I went out 
for a walk.  Came home and went to bed.  Later I wrote several versions of 
a letter to my aunt. Cried some more.

I want to know where Anita is buried.  I want to go there someday.  How 
will I ever put closure on these feelings?  Most things in life are not 
fair.

I need to talk about Anita; to make her very real before I am ready to give 
her up to death.  I think I should be logical and I continue to grieve in 
spite of myself.  I want to isolate.


November 11, 1985

I went to bed about 2 a.m.  I finished the letter to Florence and I am at 
peace with it.  I will mail it tomorrow.

                          ***************

November 11, 1985

Dear Sister Florence,

I believe there comes a time in every person's life when we choose to 
follow a course of action that involves taking risks and is not without 
pain.  Thus is the nature of my journey which has led me to you.  I do not 
know of any way to 'gracefully' drop into your life or to introduce myself 
to you except by being honest and by being myself.

I have no way of knowing how much you know about Anita's life back in 
1954-55; so as an introduction I will tell you that I was born on March 16, 
1955 and baptized Anne Therese Trahan.  I am Anita's daughter.

I have had a lifetime to think about this moment, but I realize that this 
letter probably comes to you from out of left field.  Given the 
circumstances, I sincerely hope that this information does not hurt you or 
your memories of your sister.  If I had all the choices I had hoped for, 
this letter would have been addressed to Anita.  It was only three days ago 
that I learned of her death in 1971.  This information hurts in a way I 
have never before experienced.  I am grieving the loss of a woman who, up 
until two weeks ago, did not have a name or a face known to me.  Two weeks 
ago, however, I learned Anita's name and I found her high school yearbook 
with her senior year picture.  For those two weeks I was filled with 
excitement and felt just a step away from finding Anita.  Now I feel so 
many other things: pain, sorrow, loss, anger, frustration, confusion.

When things hurt this much I need to remind myself that I freely chose this 
process.  I want you to know, Sister Florence, that I chose to search for 
Anita not because I don't love my adoptive family, but because I could no 
longer deny the fact that I wanted to know about my beginnings, that for as 
long as I can remember, I wanted to meet the woman who gave birth to me.  I 
look at the picture of Anita as a senior in high school and for the first 
time in my life I look like someone else.  I am connected in a way I have 
never been before.

I still have so many questions, so many hopes.  I want to know you and I 
hope that you will want to know me.  I send this letter with the hope of 
hearing from you, with the hope of meeting you soon.

Sincerely,

Laura

                       **********************


November 15, 1985

Dorothy received a phone call today, sounded long distance, from a woman 
who did not give her name.  She did say that she was an 'old friend' and 
she wanted to surprise me.  Is this Florence?  Who else could it be?  
Dorothy said the woman sounded like a very warm, gentle person.  Dorothy 
told her that I would be home at 5:30.


November 16, 1985

Florence called again today.  She said that she left the mysterious message 
because she didn't know who she was talking to or if this person knew about 
my search and my letter to her.  She told me that she's always thought and 
wondered about me; she has been waiting for my return.  She said that Anita 
never got over the loss.  Florence says, "You are already loved."  Perhaps 
it is possible to love a person we don't know.  I feel that way about 
Anita.  And Florence feels that way about me.

I cried when Florence talked about Anita and her feelings.  Florence said 
she would try to find some pictures, but she said that most of what she 
holds of Anita is inside.  She said that when she entered the convent she 
left all the outside things behind.  

We have planned to meet this Tuesday the 19th.


November 21, 1985

I keep having these snapshot images of the moment when I get through the 
door at the convent and Florence appears.  In all of the images I can't 
picture what Florence will look like, nor do we connect in these images.  
It seems strange that I cannot imagine meeting her.

Another strange thing is that Anita has disappeared from my dreams.  Is 
this part of letting go?  In my waking hours I think of her constantly.  I 
have fears about lsoing Florence, especially since we haven't met yet.  I 
go around on the verge of tears.  The pit inside me doesn't get any smaller 
or hurt any less.  

I realize that if I had had a choice in 1955 I never would have chosen to 
be separated from my mother.  Having two families, one biological and one 
that has nurtured and raised me, has created an internal conflict and 
sorrow that I would rather have not had for all these years.

Unti I began this search I never was able to feel the love I have for my 
birth mother or the sorrow I felt in losing her.  All I felt was guilt for 
having any thoughts at all about this woman who gave birth to me.  I never 
could let myself acknowledge my desire to, if only one time, be held by my 
birth mother, to put my arms around her and be close to her in a way that 
was never in my life possible.

                ***********************

These are exerpts from the first letter I received from Florence.

November 23, 1985

Dear Laura,

Thank you for the lovely Thanksgiving card, and for your honest, open 
letter.  There's something about the way you write that reminds me of 
Anita--right out with what you are thinking.  I like that.

Well, to respond to your question about how I feel, here goes.  The 
feelings are multiple; how about a list:

-surprise, absolute surprise that this could happen
-joy, real joy at hearing from you
-sadness that I, and not Anita should be experiencing this contact
-astonishment and curiosity at how you found me
-delight at your courage in being able to do this
-anxiety about what this will all mean for you, for me, about how much to
 share, etc...

Your mother was a very sweet person, the youngest of four daughters.  The 
oldest is 7 years older than myself, the second - a year and a half older 
than I, yours truly (I'm 56), and Anita who was 4 years younger than I am.

She loved life, was very alive - hated school, and wanted to leave high 
school before graduation.  I would describe her as shy, alive with 
enjoyment of life and people, impulsive, direct, unsure of herself 
(remember, she followed me who loved school and always overachieved!).  She 
had many friends and they were faithful to her.

She was undoubtedly my favorite sister, and I know I was hers.  When my 
mother died she was heartbroken.  It was in 1951, and I did not get home 
much in those days because of our rules and regulations.  I think she was 
very lonely, felt abandoned, and threw herself into a round of activity to 
fill up the emptiness.  When my father remarried two years later, she was 
terribly upset.

From heaven she must indeed smile in joy to know you and I are 
communicating.  She missed you, regretted having given you up for adoption. 
I was teaching at Lauralton when she told me about you.  At the time, the 
advice was always to have the child adopted, for the sake of both mother 
and child.  I arranged to have her talk to a priest who counseled many of 
the Lauralton girls.  He advised adoption and I encouraged her to follow 
his advice.  Very sadly, she complied, and I believe she never got over it. 
So you see, you were very much loved, and she did it because she was 
advised it would be for your welfare.

That's plenty for now.  Please God, we will continue when you come.  Happy 
Thanksgiving, Laura!  You have given me much for which to be thankful.

Lovingly,

Florence

                   ************************

Exerpts from a letter from one of my first cousins...

Dear Laura,

First of all let me introduce myself.  My name is Jeanne and I'm your 
cousin!  My mother, Simone or Simmy, as everyone calls her told me about 
your letters and phone calls yesterday, Christmas day.  It was one of the 
nicest Christmas gifts I have ever received!  Welcome to the family.

Believe it or not I have thought about you often.  Your mother told me 
about you when I was about 13.  I'll never forget that conversation.  Aunt 
Nita was everyone's favorite aunt and we all looked up to her.  I guess the 
reason she told me about you was that she never wanted another mother and 
child to go through what both of you did.  There wasn't a day in her life 
that went by that she didn't think of you or regret her decision to give 
you up.  I know that for us, in this day and age, it is hard to understand 
why things happened the way they did 30 years ago.  I know from the bottom 
of my heart she would have done things differently is she could have and 
she loved you with all her heart.

I moved to Florida six years ago and I can't wait to go back to New 
England.  We hope to be able to move back in less than 5 years.  I really 
miss the change of seasons, scenery and the way of life, but it was my 
decision to come here (fool that I was) and now I have to live with it.  No 
one in our family ever does anything the easy way.  We're usually stubborn 
and pig-headed.  And those are the better points!

I am enclosing a picture of myself, my husband and our son.  I'd love to 
hear all about you and if I can, answer any questions you have.  I know 
there must be alot.

Well Laura, take care, stay warm and write soon!

Your cousin,

Jeanne

                     ********************

Somehow during the months and piles of letters I wrote to and received from 
various family members, I survived the grieving process and came to a point 
of acceptance.  I went to Anita's grave whenever I was anywhere near 
Meriden.  I talked to her inside my head frequently, a pattern that I 
continue to this day.  There are times when I feel her presence so 
strongly, and I know that on a different plane and in a different form, she 
is very much with me.  The loss has, for the most part, been transformed 
into acceptance.

The point when I really knew that I accepted the facts of my life and my 
search was in the only letter that I have ever written to Anita.


Dear Anita,

I want to be with you tonight.  I want to feel your presence by rereading 
all the details of these past months.  I love you, I always did, even 
during the times when it was too confusing to admit my feelings for you.  I 
miss you, mother, I always have.

Sometimes I close my eyes and become very quiet; waiting, wishing, 
expecting to feel your touch--a hand upon my shoulder, a kiss upon my 
cheek.  I instinctively know what your touch feels like; your thin, 
delicate hands.  I talk to you, Anita, revealing my most private thoughts, 
dreams and aspirations.

My longing for you to be alive is a never-ending sorrow.  I look across the 
room and think that by exercising my will I can make you materialize and 
come to me.  It all seems so simple, easy and real.

My hair is turning gray.  I am 33 years old, only 5 years younger than you 
were at the time of your death.  We can both take comfort that I won't have 
to die of alcoholism.  I knew for a long time that you drank.  I don't know 
why or how I knew this, I just always did.  I hoped to have found you sober 
or to have gotten you sober, a gesture of giving you life the way you gave 
me life.

I accept you as you are/were, how you lived your life and how you died.  I 
love you for the bond that was formed during those first five months.  I 
now know that you came to visit me every month at the orphange; to sit with 
me and hold me.  Others told you not to do this, that it would be too 
painful to let go.  And you didn't listen to them.

I now understand that you never did let go completely.  The picture of us 
together that you carried in your wallet proves it.  I know, really know, 
that you loved me.

If in this screwed up universe I can reach out to you through my spirit and 
we can meet, then you will know how much I love you.

This is not goodbye, Anita.  This is only the beginning.

               

    re: .39
    
    Laura - I read every one of those 595 lines and it was beautiful.
    (I'm sure those whose offices are near mine are wondering why all
    of the sniffling is coming from my office!) More than once, I had
    to stop reading to collect myself. (can't be sobbing in here, after
    all...)
    
    Thank you, thank you, thank you for sharing that.
    
     -Amy.

        A very  close friend of mine is adopted - thank you for helping
        me understand him a little better.
        
        Andy
        
        

    Just one point when reading and considering such articles. 
            
    >A very  close friend of mine is adopted - thank you for helping
    >me understand him a little better.

    Try to avoid the generalization trap. I read through the article
    and did not see anything familiar to me. And I'm adopted! No one's
    going to understand me any betterr by reading this story. So I just
    wanted to mention that we don't all go through this process of
    searching and wondering etc.
    
    I for one have gone pretty much a life time with out giving it a
    thought and have never appreciated outsiders (aquantances, strangers)
    offering their sympathy or understanding. I know I can't be the
    only one that says that the fact that I was adopted is no big deal.

    Gail

    re: .43
    
    Gail,
    
    I think you make a very important point about using generalizations.
    Not all adoptees feel the same way I do, or they feel some things,
    not all things, etc.
    
    However, based on what you have written in your reply #26, I find
    it hard to understand why you would say in reply #43 that adoption
    for you was no big deal.  It seems that it has had an impact on
    your life, maybe not the experiences and impact that it has had
    on mine, but with FLAMES ON in your reply #26, it does seem like
    there is some anger happening...or at least some unresolved feelings
    or issues.  
    
    Perhaps I'm totally off-base or have mis-interpreted your reply
    #26.  Can you help me out by expanding on some of the things you
    brought up in #26 in relation to your comment in #43 about it being
    no big deal?
    
    Regards,
    
    Laura
    

    re .44
    
    I understand the confusion with the mixed messages Laura. I say
    that for most of my life it is no big deal, this is true. Of course
    it's had an impact on my life, it's a part of who I am. But what
    I'm saying is that I have never made it a big part, it's barely
    a little part of who I am. 
    
    The issues that I Flamed On about in .26 were presented to show
    another view of adoption, they are not issues that come up often,
    but I guess when they do, such as this topic, I do have strong feelings
    on them. In the normal course of my life the adoption piece just
    doesn't come up. 
    
    After rereading what I wrote in .26 I think it may be anger more
    properly vented in a topic on child abuse. It's just happened to
    be that the children involved are adopted. Therefor my reaction
    was: adopted children are not = special children. The chances of
    adopted children living in a negative home situation are the same 
    (I'd guess) as children living with their biological parents.
    
    My feeling is that X percent of any type of parent, has children
    that they wish they didn't have. These parents include adoptive
    parents. The adoptive parents went through alot more work to get
    the children that they didn't want, ie: they got the children for
    the wrong reasons. I don't know what X is. Anything over 0% is to
    high...  
    
    Luckly (hopefully?) the majority of parents have and get children
    for all the right reasons. My remarks on adopting children where
    not aimed at them.
    
    Gail

    

    Thanks for the clarification, Gail.
    
    I think that the issue you raised can and should be a part of this
    forum.  There are many, many aspects to adoption, to being in a
    family, and I see no reason why they shouldn't be addressed here.
    
    Although I did not experience the direct messages that you
    received...i.e. the we can send you back threats, I do know that
    my mother had difficulties with me, my personality, and the fact
    that I physically looked so different from the rest of the family.
    She was really invested in insisting I was Irish.  I knew that was
    a total joke, but it gave me a message that hurt at times.
    
    As for my own experience, I think there are some that have shaped
    me and how I related to others, how I operate in the world, and
    how I have viewed myself.
    
    But for the fact that there are so many different feelings and
    experiences surrounding adoption...I feel that this forum is vital
    as a means of exploring the issues.  We all can learn from each
    other.  I just keep wondering where the other adoptees and birth
    parents are...the ones who still are silent for whatever reasons.
    
    Sometimes I feel like a voice in the wilderness out here!  So thanks
    for speaking up, Gail, and please stay active in this forum.
    
    Regards,
    
    Laura
    

    Though I'm not adopted myself, a very close friend of mine was in
    foster care throughout her entire childhood.  Four years ago we
    went to the Adoption Connection and thru them and her own investigation
    she located her birth mother, 1 sister, 3 brother and 2 nieces.
     She's gotten very close to her sister and nieces and the entire
    experience has given her the roots she sought and a family which
    she'd never felt she had.  She was warmly received by her whole
    birth family ... It's really been pretty terrific ... however,
    I told her about this note and she asked if anyone had any ideas
    on getting information about a birth father.  That is the one 
    missing link that her birth mother has refused to discuss and
    somewhat forbidden her to pursue ... I think she will eventually
    and she has some basic information but is afraid of alienating
    her birth mother by pursuing it at the present time.  
    
    Any information would be appreciated,
    
    	Abby
    

        Gail,
        
        There is no generalisation trap  in  this  case, but thanks for
        your observation.  I've known John  for  over  20  years,   and
        he's never given up his curiosity about  his  background;    he
        doesn't  relate  well  to his adoptive parents, and  over  this
        time, has come to regard me as the brother  he never had in his
        life.  Laura's very touching note contains several similarities
        to what John  has  experienced  and  has told me about, hence I
        feel that thanks to Laura, I understand him a little better.
        
        Andy
        

    Hi Abby,
    
    Well, if your friend's birth father wasn't listed on the original
    birth certificate, then in terms of getting information, there is
    probably little that The Adoption Connection can do in this situation.
    However, if your friend lives anywhere near the Boston area then
    she may want to start taking her birth mother to the monthly meetings.
    This is in the event that all interested parties live in the greater
    Boston  area.
    
    Birth fathers are generally the best kept secret.  Often times birth
    mothers do refuse to talk  about them.  I mean, it really does bring
    up alot of painful stuff for birth mothers.  Your friend's birth
    mother really needs to be in contact with other BM's who have dealt
    with their feelings and have come to understand that their adult
    child has a RIGHT to know her/his birth father.
    
    In my case, I was fortunate that my birth mother lived with her
    older sister during her pregnancy, and that sister did know who
    my birth father is.  So often, it  is only the birth mother that
    knows the identity of the BF.  Now, at first my aunt didn't want
    to tell me his name.  She was still invested in him being the bad
    guy.  After she thought about it for about a month, she and her
    husband told me his name, but then told me that he had been sent
    to prison for stealing firearms while my birth mother was pregnant.
    Thus the reason they didn't get married.  I think  they thought
    that this would discourage me from contacting him.  Families can
    do really strange things sometimes.  BTW, my birth father never
    was in prison!
    
    Your friend may want to write a letter to her birth mother (rather
    than discussing the issue verbally) explaining her needs to have
    a complete genetic history and that by withholding the information
    she is supporting the same kind of structure that has been separating
    them for all those years.  It may give her birth mother time to
    think about what it all means.  Also, sometimes birth mothers fear
    that this will, in some way , mean that they have to have contact
    with the man who was their lover so many years ago.  It all can
    get pretty screwed up at times.
    
    But maybe Susan Darke from the Adoption Connection can offer some
    insights as to how your friend might approach her birth mother.
    Hope they can work things out.
    
    Regards,
    
    Laura
    

    All you noters are now in big trouble, I finally got my dial up
    working from home....
    
    
I received a mail messege from Lorna asking me about my birth father.  So 
it's her fault that I'm now working up another 5 billion lines of my 
story...(just kidding, Lorna).

So...just when you thought it was safe to go back into =wn=...

                   Laura's Story - Part II



In December of 1985 I met Theresa, the older sister that Anita 
had lived with during her pregnancy with me.  Theresa and her husband, 
Charles, both knew my birth father's identity and also knew where he was 
currently living.

When I met Theresa and Charlie for this first time I asked them, during the 
course of the conversation, if they knew who my birth father was.  This was 
the wrong question to ask, clearly, and it was Charlie who gave me the 
number about how 'he' wasn't the kind of person I would want to know and 
that I wouldn't mean anything to him, etc.  So, I let the subject drop for 
the time being.

Sometime during the month of January, 1986, Theresa and Charlie came to 
Boston to visit me.  I had given some serious thought to this issue of 
their withholding information from me, and decided to assert myself a bit.  
Well, I guess they had had time to think about the implications of 
withholding this information from me, so it was during this visit that they 
told me my birth father's name.  Theodore Kronenberger.  Ted.  And he had 
lived in Meriden all his life and was still living there.

It was Charlie who invented the story about Ted going to jail.  It was very 
clear how they felt about him then and now, he was still being cast in the 
role of 'bad guy.'  I alread had a pretty good idea about what Anita was 
like during her younger years.  She had started drinking when she was 
around 17 years old, she was rebelling against her father who had remarried 
after her mother died, and she dated a lot.  So it didn't quite wash with 
me that Ted was solely to 'blame' for the fact that Anita had gotten 
pregnant when she did.

I didn't protest much their portrayal of Ted, I was just grateful that I 
now knew the name of my birth father.  A quick check in the city and town 
directory told me that Ted was married.  I knew that my contact with him 
had to be very discreet because I had to assume that s wife didn't know 
about me. 

It took me a while to be ready and able to take on yet another family, I 
was still trying to integrate family members and my new-found sense of 
identity after finding all the Trahans.  So I waited a while until I felt 
ready to take this next step.

So I agonized over yet another letter and came up with the following 
approach:


March 21, 1987


Dear Mr. Kronenberger,

I realize that you do not know me, but your name was given to me by Charles 
C., the husband of Theresa (Trahan).  Theresa is my aunt and the older 
sister of Anita (Trahan).

I understand from my aunt and uncle that you were a friend of Anita during 
her early twenties.  I am assuming that Anita was as open about her 
pregnancy with her friends as she was with her family, and that you know 
she gave up a child for adoption in 1955.  I am that child, now 32 years of 
age.

In July of 1985 I began a search for my birth mother, Anita, and in the 
process, located my birth grandparents in late October of '85.  The agency 
that helped me with my search made the initial contact with my 
step-grandmother to see if they could get a current address for Anita.  It 
was through my step-grandmother that I learned Anita had died in 1971.

I grew up knowing that I was adopted.  I knew at a very early age that 
someday I would want to find and meet the woman who had given birth to me.  
The news of her death was devastating.  I had prepared myself for the 
possbility of rejection, but never considered the possibility of permanent 
loss.  I accept the way the events of my life have gone, but the pain of 
this loss will be with me forever.

Given these circumstances, my first contact with my family of origin was 
with my aunt, Florence.  Fortunately I was no secret to any of Anita's 
sisters.  My family of origin has warmly accepted me.  They all have been 
very generous with stories, pictures and their memories of Anita.  Their 
support and encouagement has helped me during this journey.

As much as Anita's family knows about her, I have wondered if there are 
thoughts and feelings that she revealed to her friends, but not her family.  
I know, at times, that I act differently with my friends than I do with my 
family.  Perhaps we al do that to some degree.  Thus the reason for this 
letter to you, Anita's friend during her younger years.  Perhaps you would 
be able and willing to offer a friend's perspective of my birth mother.

I do hope you understand my reasons for making this request of you you.  It 
would mean a lot to me to hear from you, but I will understand and not 
bother you further if you do not respond.

Yours very truly,

Laura





Well, I figured I had left the issue wide open.  Ted would not have to 
acknowledge me or his paternity if he didn't want to.  I mailed the letter 
and held my breath.

Ted called me the same day that he received my letter.  By the time he 
called me that evening he had already told his wife and his 8 other 
brothers and sisters about me.

In a word, Ted is wonderful.  Although he is not used to all this adoption 
and search stuff, he really pushes himself to be open and to try and talk 
about his feelings.  

He was the missing link in my history, and he was able to fill in the 
details about his relationship with Anita.

Ted was married, but separated from his wife at the time he met Anita.  His 
younger sister who was Anita's friend had introduced them.  They dated for 
a while, Anita got pregnant, and Ted was still legally married.  According 
to both Ted and another one of my aunts, Anita didn't think that pregnancy 
was a real good reason for marriage anyway, not that Ted was free to marry.
Ted ended up going back to the wife he had separated from and stayed in 
that marriage for 25 years.  His wife was an alcoholic who had a 
still-birth in her 8th month of one pregnancy, then had a couple more 
miscarriages, making me Ted's ONLY child.

It is an interesting role for me to be in.  Ted now wants to be a father 
figure and a provider, in fact, it seems to me that he really NEEDS to be 
in this role.  Sometimes I feel that he is competing with my father 
(adoptive father), and yet he seems to be o.k. with the fact that I call 
him 'Ted.'  Since I didn't go through this process with Anita, most days I 
feel that I don't know what the hell I should or shouldn't be doing in this 
relationship.

There are times when I feel so connected with him.  In terms of my physical 
appearance, I am a nice blend of Anita and Ted.  So there are facial 
expressions and gestures that are identical, and it really takes me by 
surprise sometimes.  There are times when he's serious into his 'father' 
role, and it moves me very deeply, and I would like to be able to call him 
father or dad.  But then I fall all over my loyalty issues to my parents.  
In my head I know that none of this changes the love I have for them or the 
bond of parent and child.  In my heart, it feels very different.

So Ted and I go along trying to figure out what feels comfortable.  He is 
really into giving me things, which at first made me very nervous.  I 
didn't want him to feel that I searched for him so I could get material 
things out of the deal.  I finally figured out that that was my baggage 
from things people had said to me about the search, and that Ted was doing 
what he was doing because he wanted to do it.  

Mostly we're doing fine, but we still have our times when we cast around 
for the right thing to say, or have those moments when it seems so strange 
that for all the genetic similarities, up until 1987 we had lived as 
strangers to each other.

In 1986 I began being closely monitored because I was having problems with 
eyes.  They were concerned that my retinas might detach.  I have since come 
to learn that Ted's older brother had a very serious case of detached 
retinas, so it  is interesting to see the common medical threads that run 
from both sides of my biological families on into me. 

Both Ted's parents died young, he seems not very willing to talk about the 
how and why of this.  So I don't push him on it.  Interestingly enough, 
Ted's youngest sister was an infant when their mother died.  So this 
youngest child was adopted by a family cousin or aunt or something...it 
gets a little confusing because there are so many of them.  Barbara and I 
have talked about our adoption experiences, and it really was a very 
different thing for her because at around the age of 10, she came to 
understand that the people she was refering to as her 'cousins' were really 
her 8 other brothers and sisters.  She had a context, genetically speaking, 
into which she fit.  She too is just beside herself with excitement that I 
found Ted.  It has meant alot to all family members involved.

For all these years, both sides of my birth family have been going around, 
blaming themselves for the fact that I was separated from the family.  I 
was not the only one that had old hurts to be healed and feelings to be 
resolved.

I now jokingly say that I have 3,826 relatives, which is entirely too much 
for any one person to have!  At some point I will write a bit about my 
half-siblings, the two children Anita gave birth to after she married 
Joe. 

There really aren't any roadmaps for how to become family when everyone is 
now an adult, but it seems that everything is going to work itself out 
because we're able to stay open and talk things out.  After all these years 
of separation, none of us seem willing to take anything for granted or 
operate on assumptions.
   

Reprinted without permission from the New York Times Magazine, September 
11, 1988.
    
     






              CHOSEN AND GIVEN by Robin Marantz Henig



I once tutored junior-high geometry, and one of my most difficult pupils 
would sit at the kitchen table--wild hair flying, bubble gum popping--as 
she insisted again and again that she didn't understand.

Her parents were well educated, successful and smart, so her attitude and 
apparent slowness somehow did not seem to fit into this home, with its 
books and magazin and intellectual accomplishment.

Later, when she failed her geometry Regents, a mutual friend told me that 
my pupil was adopted--and that, my friend said, explained her terrible 
grades.  It did not, of course, fully explain her problem, but research is 
beginning to show that the adoption might have played an important part


By no means do all adopted children have attitude or behavior or learning 
difficulties.  "In fact, the majority of them do very well in life," says 
Dr. David Brodzinsky, a Rutgers University psychologist who has conducted 
one of the nation's largest studies of adopted children.  But his and other 
studies of adoptees are reaching some surprising conclusions about the 
ramifications of being adopted.

Even people like my geometry student, adopted as infants, go through 
troubled periods in their lives when they grieve for the unknown parents 
who gave them away.

"A lot of the behavioral problems seen in adopted children are nothing more 
that a greif reaction," Brodzinsky says.  "For adoptees, part of them is 
hurt at having once been relinquished.  That part remains vulnerable for 
the rest of their lives."

Adopted children (excluding those adopted by members of their own families) 
make up about 1 to 2 percent of the total population of children.  The 
majority of them were so-called "early adoptions": adoptions arranged 
before or shortly after birth, completed during infancy, and most often 
accomplished by adoptive parents who are white and middle class or 
upper-middleclass.  But even though most of these children are raised in 
privileged environments, adoptees are overrepresented in places where 
trouble occurs.  They make up about 5 percent of the children in 
out-patient mental-health facilities; 10 percent of the children in 
inpatient mental-health facilities; 6 to 9 percent of the children 
identified by school systems as either perceptualy, neurologically or 
emotioanlly impaired.

Some of these numbers might be a statistical artifact.  In many adoptive 
homes, parents seek professional help at the first sign of trouble, and 
most of them can afford it, so their children my make it onto the patient 
rolls of mental-health centers more quickly than other children in similar 
distress.

"People who adopt are accustomed to using the helping profession," writes 
Lois Ruskai Lein in "Raising Adopted Children.:"  If they are infertile, as 
many adoptive parents are, they may have grown accustomed to inviting 
medical personnel into the most intimate parts of their lives.  And once 
they decide to adopt, they have to enlist the help of doctors, lawyers, 
counselors and social workers.  "While some people have no idea who to to 
call for needed therapy," Melina writes, "the adoptive parents may know a 
social worker by name."

Some of this higher risk can be traced to genetics, or to the intrauterine 
environment.  Adopted children run a higher-than-normal chance of having 
been exposed to a prenatal environment that would be considered deprived.  
If a pregnant woman plans to place her baby for adoption, she is more 
likely than a typical pregnant woman to be a teen-ager (putting her at 
higher-than-normal risk of pre-term birth and complicated delivery), to be 
impoyerished (generally meaning poor prenatal care), or to decline to give 
up drinking, smoking or taking drugs during her pregnancy.

But some of the risk, perhaps a good deal, can be traced to the adoption 
itself.  A generation ago, few experts recognized what is now seen as one 
inescapable fact of adopton:  it is a psychological burden to the adoptee.
At that time, adoptive parents were instructed--as they are to this day--to 
talk about adoption early in their children's lives, lest the child finnd
out about it from someone else.  But the unspoken assumption was that 
talking about adoption was much like talking about sex: if the child was 
told about it early enough and thoroughly enough, the subject could be 
considered closed after the telling was done.

Ignored in this advice was the wisdom of Pearl S. Buck, who, writing in the 
early 1960's about her own work with adopted children, said adoption can 
for many remain a hurt for a lifetime: "When all questions are answered, or 
if not answered, accepted as unanswerable, there does remain, however, a 
permanent wound, which I fear is never entirely healed.  It is contained in 
that old eternal question that strikes at the very root of life, 'How could 
she give me up?' the child asks."

For adoptees going through vulnerable periods in their lives--marriage, the 
birth of a child, the death of a parent--that hurt can re-emerge with 
surprising force.

One young man, a patient of Brodzinsky's, never worried much about being 
adopted until his first child was born.  When he saw his daughter's big 
nose, a nose that looked so much like his own, the man suddenly realized 
that this was his first known biological relative.  "It hit him like a 
sledgehammer," Brodzinsky says.  "He was 28 years old, and this was the 
first time in his life that he could saya 'Flesh of my flesh.'"

Studies have been done of the effect on child development of divorce, 
stepfamilies and parental death.  But no one has systematically transferred 
what is known about these gains and losses to the context of adoption.  
Slowly, researchers are starting to realize that adoption is something that 
doesn't go away.

Brodzinsky and his colleagues at Rutgers, in studying the development of 
130 adopted children, found that adoptees are psychologically 
indistinguishable from nonadoptees only until the age of 5 or 6.  Then the 
ramifications of adoption start to dawn on them.

In their preschool years, these children heard and accepted their parents' 
explanations of adoption as a unique form of family-building, a way for 
parents to get the baby they were yearning for, a way to bring home and 
love their "chosen child." 

But as they get older, and develop logical thinking skills, adopted 
youngsters begin to understand the reciprocal side of that "chosen child" 
story: for someone to have chosen them, it means someone else must have 
given them away.

One 9-year-old boy in the Rutgers study called it "the master question of 
my life--why was I given up for adoption?"

As the adopted children mature, Brodzinsky found, the object of their 
grieving often changes.  At first, the sense of loss may be 
straight-forward: I had a set of parents once and I don't have them now.  
Later, the grief can become mixed with guilt: if only I had been better, 
prettier, quieter, smarter, I might have been kept.

During adolescence, the period when the primary psychological task is what 
the psychoanalyst Erik Erikson has called the "identity crisis," the 
frieving will, in many instances, become more complex and more abstract.  
As Brodzinsky puts it, "Adolescents not only grieve the loss of the unknown 
birth parents--which is found among elementary-school children as well-but 
they also grieve the loss of part of themselves."

Such grieving--even when it is progressing normally--can bring with it 
temporary behavioral dysfunction.  As with any other grieving aafter any 
other loss, a grieving adopted child pregresses through stages of shock, 
denial, protest, despair and recovery, though not necessarily in that order 
and not necessarily so clearly demarcated.

More than one third of the children between ages 6 and 11 who took part in 
the Rutgers study--in which each adoptee was matched with a nonadoptee of 
the same age, sex, family structure, number of siblings, and socioeconomic 
status--showed signs of maladjustment.

The children's mothers were asked to rate their children for certain 
behaviors.  The adoptees, according to their mothers, had more than twice 
the rate of significant problems--38 percent versus 17 percent--with the 
biggest being uncommunicative behavior and hyperactivity in boys, and among 
the the girls, depression, hyperactivity, delinquency and aggression.

Adoptive parents often want to minimize the significance of adoption to 
their child--after all, don't they love their children every bit as much as 
if they were children of natural birth?  But this "rejection-of-difference 
pattern" of family interaction, first described by the sociologist H. David 
Kirk in the 1950's, may be a disservice to the adopted child.

From Kirk onward, adoption experts have advocated another family style: the 
"acceptance-of difference pattern."  Adoptive families are different from 
biological families--not deviant, not deficient, just different.  When 
these differences are acknowledged and accepted, adopted children get on 
with the psychological task of dealing with those differences--by talking 
about them, by finding out about or even contacting their birth parents, 
and by moving on.

The fact of being adopted places an additional stress on the lives of most 
adoptees, says Sally Ryan, a Washington psychotherapist and the adoptive 
mother of two children.  But, she adds: "The way your child experiences 
that stress depends on how comfortable the family is with adoption, how 
comfortable your friends and neighbors are, how well the child's inborn 
traits fit in with the style of the family.  For many, there's always a 
sadness about it.  As a parent, I feel an additional burden knowing Sam and 
Molly have a pain, and will carry that pain all their lives."



               

I have been giving some thought to the New York Times article, and although 
I think it does a good job of presenting a high level look at some key 
issues surrounding adoption, it also leaves a lot of unanswered questions, 
not perhaps for some adoptees, but for the general reader/public.

I suppose some of my basic 'flame' objections are to the use of terms like 
'the experts say this and such...'  For so long, the 'experts' didn't know 
their ass from their elbow when it came to dealing with adoption, any 
aspect of it.  I have a friend who is now in her 50's, and in her first 
years as a social worker, worked in an adoption agency arranging adoptions. 
She has said, upon several occasions, that she and several of her 
colleagues feel that they should write a public letter of apology to all 
adoptees for the harm that they caused in their ignorance of the issues.  
Her ability to be this open has taken away most of my rage and hostility 
toward the 'experts' who advised my own parents in a manner that made it 
impossible for them to ever be open to talking about adoption as I was 
growing up.  But I am at least able to recognize that I still have some 
rements of bad feelings toward the issue of whose and expert and who isn't. 
So I'm glad to see that these psychologists are getting off their duffs and 
asking the real experts about the subject, the adoptees.

I was, on the other hand, pleased to see that this article took on the 
issue, perhaps not as in-depth as I think it needs to be addressed, of the 
'chosen child' story.  It seems that as a society, we have needed to stay 
in deep denial by falling back on the sweet 'chosen child' story.  So often 
I have had my own experience invalidated by these well-meaning people who 
like to push the 'chosen child' myth into my face.  Like..."it is SO 
beautiful that your parents chose you and REALLY wanted you...you shouldn't 
be upset because you're adopted when, in fact, you were wanted SO much by 
your parents."  See the set-up?  My, my, what an ungrateful, rotten little 
child you are for not being elated about being adopted.  It seemed that no 
one wanted to face the more difficult issue of the reality that a mother 
has given away her child, her helpless, defenseless infant.  All the 
messages in our society really say that this woman has done the unthinkable 
and unspeakable.  So if we just don't talk about this 'little' fact, then 
we can all stay in denial and just focus on how wonderful and beautiful it 
is that someone else really wanted this child.  It may be convenient, but 
for an adoptee, it just doesn't wash.  Fortunately, the 'experts' are 
starting to look at the other side of being 'chosen' which is being 
rejected.

The other area that is being looked at is the part about difference.  There 
are very real differences within adoptive families.  In my family I was 
surrounded by fair skinned, freckled, red-haired relatives.  My father is 6 
feet tall, my mother is 5' 8" with the above mentioned complexion.  I am 5' 
1", a more brown complexion, dark hair and eyes, and have a personality 
that matches absolutely no one in either my immediate or extended family.
I don't think my parents were adequately prepared for the fact that there 
would be precious little of themselves being reflected back at them in this 
strange little person that was their daughter.

Being french and polish, as I now know today, I have certain mannerisms 
that are clearly a part of the genetic 'me,' hard-coded, not learned, 
always have been there.  These particular mannerisms that were so foreign 
to my Irish adopted family, were just one of the verbalized points of 
conflicts during the years that I was growing up.  "Why do you talk with 
your hands, why do you walk that way, talk that way, etc."  It made my 
parents uncomfortable to see the parts of me that were so obviously 
different from them.  The fact is that I have learned that the way I talk 
with my hands comes from my birth mother, and how I have always walked is 
identical to my birth father.

So adoptive parents do need to value differences, does this sound familiar 
to you DEC employees?  If only all these differences could have been o.k. 
as I was growing up, I don't think I would have found myself hating who I 
was because I was different.  I used to dread the words, "you're 
different."  These words were a burden and a curse.

Part of the reason that the 'experts' were so invested in maintaining the 
denial structures had to do with the crew of psychologists that were the 
popular theory in the 50's and 60's that said environment was the key 
factor in people's development.  Genetics were less important.  So if you 
took anyone and put them in the proper environment, regardless of genetics, 
they could come out being 'successful' by whatever standards success was 
then being measured.  Adoptive parents have a very big need to feel that 
they can influence their adopted children via the environment.  There is a 
real need to believe that in the absence of genetic 'control' (for lack of 
a better way to phrase it) over their children, environment will 'overcome' 
genetics or make up for the fact that there is no genetic connection within 
the family.

The article is right on when it addresses the need for adoptees to 'make 
peace with' or grieve the losses in their lives.  In the  the more 
traditional settings, adoptees have not felt that it was o.k. to do this 
processing.  And if a person gets past the guilt around needing to do this 
grieving or processing around the adoption issues, so often it has been 
without the support of our parents.  If we are lucky or I don't know what, 
we've had the wherewithall to connect with a therapist.  And then if we get 
lucky again, we've happened to find a good therapist that truly understands 
what it is we're talking about rather than being one of the old time 
'experts' with a heavy investment around denying our feelings.

For me, the only way to quiet the emotional battleground on which all these 
conflicting feelings and societal messages were being played out was to 
give myself permission to search for the answers.  It was a welcomed relief 
to finally be able to step out of the fantasy world I had created as a 
child, and step into the real world as an adult who was finally able to 
feel like an adult.

                                                         

    Laura,
    
    It occured to me when I read your note that one thing that could
    have helped our kids accept adoption so well is that we always
    expected them to be different from us, because we'd chosen kids
    of mixed racial background. We've made a point of encouraging them
    to be proud of their heritage.
    
    Also I have definitely seen attitudes toward life, school etc in
    my children that I believe are the result of the differences in
    our genetic heritage. It has sometimes made communication difficult
    but we do try and talk and work things out...with greater or lesser
    success depending on the kid and their age.
    
    We told all of our kids that their mothers were unmarried couldn't
    take care of a baby. Further when they got older we pointed out
    that their mothers chose to give them birth rather than have an
    abortion. Both of these *seem* to have made the issue of rejection
    a minor one, at least so far. Tho I entirely admit I am not privey
    to my kids private musings and fears.
    
    Bonnie

    re: .53
    
    Bonnie, 
    I'm wondering, though, if more parent/adoptee experiences aren't
    like the one you were able to provide for your family in terms of
    openness and acceptance.  I mean, so far this note we've had two
    adoptive parents respond and two adoptees respond.  The rest of
    the replies are from those who have parents/friends/SO's who are
    adopted, or replies from people thinking about adoption.
    
    I am suspicious of the overwhelming silence from the ranks of adoptive
    parents, adoptees and birth parents.  In the majority of experiences,
    then, have we indeed learned our lessons well when it comes to being
    silent or not open about this issue?  I don't know how else to explain
    the silence.
    
    I am well aware that if my parents could have provided an open
    environment like the one you have provided for your children, my
    experiences would have been very different.  With that kind of openness
    I probably would have searched for my family of origin as soon as
    I reached majority age rather than waiting until I was 30 years
    old.  And if there had been that kind of openness in my family,
    I probably would have been able to share my search experiences with
    my parents.  Given the current situation, they know nothing about
    my story.  
    
    Although an open and honest environment does not change some of
    the basic facts surrounding adoption, it does provide that critical
    supportive environment in which to deal with them.  
    
    But I am still extremely puzzled by the silence within this note.
    Do you think it's somewhat strange?  Can you come up with any reasons
    why there are so few of us discussing these issues?
    
    Regards,
    
    Laura
    

    Laura,
    
    Well, open as I am, my kids really don't like to talk about
    adoption. So even tho they are - to my mind anyway - mentally
    healthy, normal teenagers - adoption is just not something
    that is a big issue with them. Further they can get annoyed
    if I harp on it too much. So one possibility is that other
    adoptees in the file just don't consider it to be an issue
    that interests them. Most of the time around our house, it is
    not certainly, just when things like this discussion surface.
    
    Other than that, there may not be a lot of adoptees among those
    who feel comforable and free about writing in the file. There
    are probably more readers than writers in the file and there
    are surely adoptees among the readers who are following this
    discussion but are not comfortable writing in notes, or at least
    not yet.
    
    and of course there are also people for whom the subject is so painful
    that they can't talk about it...
    
    so those are my guesses - it isn't a hot issue for some, some aren't
    comfortable with writing, and some it is too painful, and perhaps
    there aren't that many adoptees reading this...I just can't say
    more than that.
    
    Bonnie

    re: .52 and the comment about "differences"
    
    My daughters and I stumbled upon a different (pun intended) version
    of Twenty Questions.  We were walking to the day care center one
    morning, and suddenly one of them commented how my (the Mom) hair
    color was brown "just like mine [the daughter]" and the other
    joined in with how my hair was straight "just like *mine* [the other
    daughter]"                                                 
    
    I quickly chose that opportunity to discuss what were similarities
    and differences between/among the three of us.  That rapidly changed
    to a "see if you can guess the next one..."
    
    From then on, any visitor, dinner guest, etc., had to play
    "Differences" with us!  (I must admit here that when I arrived at
    DEC 3 and 1/2 years ago, I was struck by the "valuing differences"
    theme, which caused many memories.)
    
    The game was characterized by the following example:  One person,
    here one of the children, would say that "X and Y are the same"
    (X, Y were the children) or "X and Y are the same and Z is different".
    It was pretty easy for me at first -- "I'm the oldest, right?" 
    but then they got very good.  One of us was different than the other
    two because one had short sleeves under a sweater, whereas the other
    two had long sleeves under a sweater...
    
    The only thing that was trickier was the original Twenty Questions,
    which we played only occasionally after that, and trying to guess
    "a buttonhole" [well, is it bigger than a breadbox or not??? ;-)].
    
    However, I don't mean to make light of these issues.  There were
    and still are some wonderful times together, but there also were,
    and are, some problems.  The problems we "anticipated" such as
    "what will the neighbors say," were not the main problems we
    encountered.  We (my husband and I) were genuine believers in
    "environment" and the social workers didn't yet know about the
    problems that were to be recognized among children who were
    adopted.  I spent much time organizing adoptive parents and
    children into support and friendship groups, and with other
    researchers who have studied adoptive families.  For the most
    part, the problems encountered are surprisingly similar.  But
    then, there are problems in ALL families, and these are just
    more issues to deal with and help each other through.
    
    I also remember a fellow graduate student who used to baby sit
    for me in the mid-70's.  I always took the "birthday girl" out
    for a special dinner with Mom (as well as other separate events
    with each child on occasion), and after returning home and getting
    both girls into bed, I was chatting with my friend.  I wondered
    aloud whether my daughter's birth mother ever remembered this
    date (daughter now about 7).  My friend replied "YES" in a *very*
    somber tone, so I looked at her and said, "yes...???"  It turned
    out that she had had a child almost the same age, and was always
    very sad on the anniversary of the birth, wondering where and how
    her child was.
    
    I expect to help my daughter find her "other" parents if and when
    she is ready, and I have made that clear from the beginning.  I
    was fortunate enough to see the names on some legal documents
    that should not have been left uncovered, so we will have more
    leads than most people have with closed adoptions.  I know that
    this note was focussed on the adoptee's experiences, but every
    now and then, I think about how difficult it would be not to know
    if a child of mine was okay, etc.  But that is probably best left
    for another note.
    
    	Pennie

    re: .56
    
    Pennie,
    
    This note is not here just for the adoptees' experience, but to
    discuss all the issues conerning adoption.  Just because I happen
    to be a big-mouth who happens to be an adoptee, doesn't mean that
    this forum in exclusive to adoptee's experiences.  I keep putting
    things in here to keep the forum going, to stimulate discussion,
    to educate, etc.  In fact, I think that Marie's article deomonstrates
    that we do need to have a variety of voices in here.
    
    I have been contemplating typing in some stories from a book that
    is a collection of birth mother's experiences in Australia.  Although
    it could well be the experiences of any women any where.  I think
    it's time to do that.  Oh...my aching fingers...
    
    And Bonnie, thanks for the insights into the silences.  I forget
    how long it took me to be comfortable about taking on my own adoption
    issues.  Maybe anonymous entries might feel comfortable to those
    who are not comfortable with such a public forum?  As for the issue
    of it being too painful for some to talk about and that maybe the
    information here will help begin to heal those long-standing wounds...
    then I'll keep writing and sharing information and hope that it
    can contributed to the healing process.
    
    Laura
    

    If you really want all sides to the issues, I'm a mother who has
    put two of her children out for adoption at different times.  My
    children and I survived a very battered and abused background with
    my first (legally insane) husband that included such delights as
    incest and rape.  In the first instance, my 10 year old son had
    "run away" because of the abuse (smart kid!) and Social Services
    wanted to return him home.  To literally save his life, I told them
    "no" but to put him out for adoption.  (My husband was avidly awaiting
    his return.)  The second time was after I became a single parent
    with 5 children still at home. One of my younger daughters was becoming
    extremely erratic and violent in her behavior and reminded me of
    her father so I had her tested for schzophrenia (sp?).  I was told
    she needed at least 10 years of therapy; in the meantime, she was
    beating up her younger brother and sister whenever she got the chance
    and causing so much harm at home that I finally put her out for
    adoption so the other children had at least some chance of normalcy
    in their lives.  It was a difficult decision.  I don't regret it
    even though the other children miss their siblings and have tried
    to keep in touch.  Yes, I very much want both these children to
    have good lives.  I wish it could have been with me, but it isn't
    and probably never will be.  They both feel betrayed and rightly
    blame me for their situations.  That's okay too.  I remember every
    birthday they've ever had.  I wonder what and how they're doing.
    I wonder if they're happy at last and have a decent life.  I even
    find myself missing what might have been sometimes, but I wouldn't
    change it because deep down inside I believe I did the right thing
    for the right reasons so I keep my feelings to myself for the most
    part, and only share them with my husband or the daughters who seem
    to understand how I might feel.  To the rest of the children, I
    sent their brother and sister away.
    
    I'm not sure why I'm writing this.  I doubt that it's relevant to
    the discussion unless I want you who are adopted to know that even
    we hardnosed types "feel" when we give our children up for adoption.
    We know, probably to your first breath, your first cry, what day
    you were born.  We remember, but try to do what's best under painful
    circumstances.  We may not act like we look back, but we do, and
    we also hope we did the right thing for the right reasons at the
    right time.  Who knows, we may have saved your life since we spent
    so much time in developing it... I don't know, but for all the other
    mothers who've done the same thing, may I say to all of you who
    are adopted from us, "I love you?"
    
    Barb
                

    y heart goes out to you, Barb.  Thank you for sharing such a painful
    experienc.  What you have shared is relevant to this issue.  I met
    a woman recently whose mother did the same thing you did because
    of circumstances within her marriage.  The two children that she
    already had were told that this third sibling born had died.  I
    suppose that's a pretty accurate metaphor --death-- when dealing
    with closed adoptions.  For all extents and purposes, the child
    is dead to the mother, a permanent separation.
    
    Are you aware of CUB, Concerned United Birth Parents?  Just want
    you to know that it exists if you ever felt like connecting into
    a support network.  And again, I admire the courage it took for
    you to open up here.  Thank you.
    

    Laura and other adoptees...
    
    I didn't think I had anything to contribute to this discussion but
    something came to mind as I read some of your thoughts..
    
    I have always wanted to adopt children...the need is very similar
    to the need to procreate.  If I ever were financially able and had
    the time to devote I would have adopted a special needs child.
    
    Many women, with strong maternal instincts, feel this desire and
    raising children that are not born to them is as natural as having
    their own.
    
    Our moderator Bonnie, is a perfect example of this.  Bonnie has
    something special with her children that I enjoy witnessing.  First
    they are so normal!  When you visit the Reinke home you will see
    five children who initially seem so different.  The only two people
    who seem to have similar characteristics in the family are Bonnie
    and Don... ;-)  But as you observe Bonnie and Don and the children
    you see some real common threads that hold them together as a family.
    
    As I talk with Bonnie and we share experiences of the teen years
    I often tell her, "You shouldn't let them do that".  Bonnie listens
    does things her way and the next time I am in the company of the
    family I see things that make me realize that Bonnie and Don have
    a natural instinct for parenting and if they do make mistakes those
    mistakes are insignificant to the whole scheme of things and the
    end result is a great family.
    
    I first wrote to Bonnie because she was doing something I would
    have liked to do.  She is raising normal children that without her
    intervention they could have been statistics.  
    
    Laura, I am sure Bonnie won't mind if I say this, if you have an
    opportunity visit Bonnie and her family.  I believe Bonnie and Don
    illustrate how natural adoption is!
    
    

    Thank you Joyce, and I *do* listen to what you say and incorporate
    it into how I think/react to things! :-)
    
    Bonnie

    With all this talk of adoption and children, did anyone out there
    ever think about the problem that we (society) have?
    
    I am speaking from experience when I say this.
    
    TEENAGERS!  There are many, many teenies out there that need parents.
    Understandible it is a TASK in a half because the stat makers and
    their books say that once a teenie has "their ways" down, they are
    impossible to alter.  NOT TRUE!
    
    I am a teenie.  I was adopted at thirteen and my sister was adopted
    at eleven.  You know, package sort of deal.  I spent the first (almost)
    13 years of my life in a childrens home.  Mainly due to my "special"
    problem.  Enough of this, it is somewhat irrellivent anyhow.
    
    Jes thought that you might want to discuss another side of the issue.
    I KNOW that bonnie must have some insight on this... Bonnie?

    Al,
    
    Three of my kids were babies the the fourth age 7 when I adopted
    them, so, no I don't have any insights on adopting teenagers.
    Why don't you tell us how it was for you?
    
    Bonnie

    No, i think not Bonnie.  I wouldnt want improper assumtions and
    irritated people.
    
    I will give you some insight through personal mail if youd like...
    
    The only reason I wrote in here is to inform you people that there
    is ANOTHWER side to this dilemma also.

    re: .64
    
    I am wondering why you feel that there will be improper assumptions
    and irriatated people if you tell your sto?
    

    Hi, I've been out of town for a few days and have just caught up
    with the discussion. I don't want to discuss any specific topic
    but rather share a few thoughts that resulted from my weekend away.
    
    As I've discussed before I came from a very disfunctional adoptive
    family. I had few close friends and rarely had the opportunity to
    see "real" familys function. (real, functional familys). Well, viewing
    such familys as an adult really makes me think about this whole
    adoption thing alot more.
    
    This weekend I stayed with my SO at his parents home. I've always
    been envious of how well he communicates with his family. He lives
    some 300 miles away from them yet is closer that I'll ever dream
    of being to my family. When I got the chance to watch him interact
    with his parents I see so much of what was missing in my youth (and
    adulthood for that matter.) 
    
    I imagine other adoptees must do this, I caught myself looking for
    all the traits he'd inherited, both physical and emotional. I never
    use to give it much though that the physical traits I share with
    my parents are mearly coinsidence. Much like Laura mentioned the
    differences are rather glaring. If you put your mind to it I can
    see how you can feel "left out". The one sentence I picked up on
    from .51 was the fact that the adoption piece doesn't just go
    away after you've learned it. It resurfaces here and there. 
    And maybe affects us a little more that we even know.   
    
   Gail
   
    

    
    	I don't think what you feel when you see "functional families"
    	is totally due to adoption.  I feel the same way when I am 
    	around families who overtly show affection and caring for one
    	another.  When I was a teenager, I would feel a physical pain
    	when I would visit the homes of friends whose families were
    	demonstratively affectionate.  My family never touched.  Well,
    	I shouldn't say never -- I do remember that when I was arrested
    	at age 11, my father had tears in his eyes as he hugged me.
    	    	
    	It has taken me years to come to grips with my family life.
    	Now, when I can, I force the issue by hugging both my mother 
    	and father, and saying the L word -- LOVE.
    	
    	I guess what I am trying to say is that the biological ability 
    	to have children doesn't necessarily equate with good parenting.
	
    
    	Sharon    
    
    
    

    re: .67
    
    I don't think that the biological ability to produce children has
    anything to do with parents being good or bad parents.  I've seen
    plenty of people who 'biologically' produced their own children
    and have been dreadful parents.  I think that all adults should
    go through some kind of screening process to see if they're stable
    etc., not unlike what they put adoptive parents through. 
    
    However, what I think Gail was pointing out is that when you grow
    up in a dysfunctional family AND you're also dealing with the
    differences of adoption, it may feel even more alienating than if
    you're in a dysfunctional family but there are some parts that connect,
    if nothing more than physical appearance.  Am I speaking out of
    turn for you, Gail?    
    
    I think that the NY Times article did a pretty good job of dealing
    with the fact that, in the best of situations, adoptive families
    are different, not deficient.  But if the differences aren't dealt
    with and then you start layering garden-variety family dysfunction
    on top of it, well, I think it complicates the issue.
    
    Any other ideas out there?
    

    Well, I've sent out several brochures for the Oct. 1 American Adoption
    Congress Regional Conference in So. New Hampshire...
    
    So is anyone out there going to it?  I will be around the conference
    all day since I'm sitting on one panel in the morning and moderating
    another panel in the afternoon.  If you're going to the conference,
    speak up, I would like to be able to connect to some folks from
    =wn=.
    
    Regards,
    
    Laura
    

    Laura,
    
    I had been planning on going but due to unexpected expenses
    couldn't aford the fees! :-(
    
    Bonnie

    Yesterday I visited the home of a  friend who has an adopted child.
    On her daughters wall was a framed piece of paper with the following
    written in caligraphy:
    
    "Not flesh of my flesh 
     Nor bone of my bone
     But still miraculously my own.
     Don't forget for one minute
     You did not grow under my heart
     But within it."
    
    I thought it was so beautiful - I just wanted to share it with the
    rest of you.
    
    Suzanne

    
    Judith Gediman is in the process of writing a book based on interviews
    with birth mothers.
    

Reprinted without permission from Smith Alumnae Quarterly, Winter 1988

 
              GIVING UP THE BABY by Judith Shenker Gediman


As a student at Smith in the early '60s, my roommate and I used to spend 
hours taling about the consequences to our futures of the decision to have 
children.  We knew that children were forever, that our lives would never 
be the same.  Today, too, despite new patterns of arranging one's life to 
include both children and career, no one disputes the fact that having a 
baby will change a woman's future, forever.

As Smith students we also used to imagine the horrors of getting pregnant 
before marriage.  What would we do?  Abortion was illegal and dangerous, 
and being an "unwed mother" was completely out of the question; "single 
mothers" were not yet socially acceptable.  So, we concluded that we'd have 
the baby, give it up for adoption, and then get on with our lives.  
Consistent with the prevailing wisdom of the time, we believed that 
adoption would be the end of it, and that our lives would resume in their 
former directions as thought this "mistake" had never happened.  Such was 
the counsel given to young women who actually found themselves pregnant and 
unmarried, the traumatic circumstances my roommate and I only imagined.

One young woman who faced this crisis was a friend of mine, but I didn't 
know her story until 2 years ago when she shocked me with the announcement 
that she had had a baby twenty-one years ago; that she had given up the 
baby for adoption; and that this child, now a young woman herself, had 
searched for and found my friend, her natural mother, who, as it happens, 
had married the young woman's natural father a few years after the 
adoption.  Initally elated at having been found, my friend, her daughter 
and the rest of the family were now, a year later, in the tumultuous and 
bittersweet throes of the post-reunion period--coming to grips with the 
events of the past and forging a relationship in the present.  The secret 
was out of the closet; the daughter was here to stay.

Since the startling revelations of my friend's history, I have been struck 
repeatedly by the ways in which her life will never again be the same as in 
the pre-reunion years.  But that's fairly obvious even to the casual 
observer.  Less obvious are the ways in which the original relinquishment 
of the baby to adoption left a wave of consequences in its wake, not just 
for my friend but for the hundreds of thousands of so-called "birth 
mothers" like her.  What I have learned, from researching the reunion 
phenomenon and interviewing birth mothers, is that, contrary to what these 
young women were advised by humiliated parents and by adoption social 
workers, the fact of being a mother did not disappear with the surrender of 
the child.  Vast numbers of them were not able to put the experience behind 
them, "get over it" and "get on" with their lives.  Rather the maternal 
attachment was not severed, and adoption produced a variety of pervasive, 
life-affecting, often unhappy results.

Many found, for example, that instead of being healed by time, their 
feelings of suffering remained or even intensified.  Not allowed to grieve 
when the hushed and hurried separation took place, they carried an 
unexpressed grief through the years, sometimes afflicted by severe 
depression or other pyschological ailments years later, and often unaware 
of the connection between the adoption and the symptoms they later 
experienced.  Socially isolated as these young women were during the 
pregnancy, and often psychologically isolated thereafter by the enormity of 
the secret they carried, their self-esteem was, in many cases, severely 
damaged.  One describes herself and her counterparts as "the walking 
wounded."  Another was told she looked like a "whipped dog."  Many 
acknowledge an internal state of generalized inhibition stemming from the 
even, a fear of reaching out to the world and becoming an active 
participant.

The need to know what happened to the child they gave away seems almost 
universal, and does  not disappear.  One birth mother after another talks 
about the pain of going through life not knowing whether the child is alive 
or dead:  Is he well?  Is she happy?  What kind of like has he had?  Where 
is she?  Not knowing is compared to having a loved one missing in action--a 
loss in limbo that is never resolved.  So birth mothers find themselves 
looking, involunatarily, at every boy or girl they pass on the street, 
wondering; the enormous void of not knowing produces a perpetual, if not 
always conscious, search.  Some live for years feeling incomplete, like a 
piece of themselves is missing.

It is also extremely common for the birth mother to worry about what the 
child thinks of her.  Is she hated for having abandoned him?  Does she 
understand that she gave her up in the belief that she would enjoy a better 
life than she believed she could provide?  Ever present concerns in many, 
such thoughts tend to swell at particular times; the child's birthday, 
Mother's Day and other anniversaries and holidays can be particularly 
difficult.

In addition to the impact on their feelings about themselves and their lost 
children, birth mothers report still other kinds of consequences resulting 
from long-ago adoptions.  Some reveal that the psychic strain of living 
with such a secret over the years has taken a profound toll, consuming 
energies they might otherwise have put to more constructive educational, 
career-oriented or other pursuits.  Similarly, keeping the secret sometimes 
produced draining worries about how others would react if they found out; 
some even lived with fears of being fired.  In other cases, subsequent 
romantic relationships were affected by the woman's impaired ability to 
trust.

Adoptions also have influenced subsequent childbearing.  Some birth 
mothers, for example, became pregnant again shortly after the 
relinquishment, only later to recognize this as an unsuccessful attempt to 
replace the lost child.  The reverse effect also exists, with secondary 
infertility found to be higher among women who have surrendered children to 
adoption than among other populations.  There are also outcomes in terms of 
subsequent parenting behavior: both over-protectiveness and emotional 
distancing are cited.

Given the constellation of unresolved problems and feelings that so many 
birth mothers share, it is no wonder that large numbers of them, like my 
friend, view the sudden appearance of this grown stranger as the answer to 
their prayers.  The myth is that the birth mother ceased to care for this 
child years ago, and does not want the "intrusion" into her now, 
presumably, very ordered life.  But the reality is quite different.  For 
many birth mothers, these reunions, wherever they ultimately lead, are 
healing, because the original act of surrendering the child brought with it 
an "ever after" of unresolved wonderings and ramifications in ways that 
were never anticipated.

Had I had that unplanned pregnancy that I used to worry about, and had I 
listened to the advice of the time, what I would be doing now, it turns 
out, is waiting, hoping for the phone to ring.  If I were one of the braver 
ones--a birth mother who no longer denied my "right" to do so--I would be 
out there myself, searching.

    Well, I feel like I'm back in grammar school or something, writing
    a book report or the essay, "what I did on my summer vacation..."
    
    I went to the American Adoption Congress (AAC) regional conference
    on Saturday, and herewith a report on the day's activities.
    
    The day was scheduled to have 4 workshop sessions, with 5 different
    workshops to choose from within each of the 4 sessions.  Since I
    sat on two panels, I had a very limited choice for my optional
    workshops.  The workshops that I chose to go to vs. the ones that
    I participated in were, Bi-Racial/International Issues in Adoption
    and Make Room For Daddy: New Found Relationships with Birth Fathers.
    
    Although the workshops have been taped at the two national AAC
    conferences that I attended, these workshops were not taped, which
    I feel is most unfortunate.  There are workshops that I was not
    able to attend that I would have liked to have gotten the tapes
    from.
    
    Anyway, since my young niece (age 16) is a Korean adoptee, and is
    in the throes of a turbulent adolescense and grappling with identity
    issues, I felt compelled to go to the international adoption workshop.
    Bonnie was interested in getting information from this workshop
    since she couldn't go to the conference, so here is the information
    I picked up at that workshop:
    
    - Seems that adoption/identity issues start to surface for the first
      time in the 11-13 age bracket.
    - People tend to think that it is the bi-racial/international issues
      that can create an adoptees sense of 'not belonging', but it is
      a universal adoptee issue, not a racial/ethnic issue.
    - It is important to let adoptees think about birth mothers, to
      cry and feel the loss, to think about her, expecially if the adoptee
      was not an infant when adopted and has some memories of the birth
      mother.
    - In the case of international adoptions, there may be questions
      or uncertainty around the accuracy of the child's birth date.
      Birth date is a very important issue for the adoptee because it
      is the one date where the adoptee can say "I was connected with
      my birth mother on this date."  If the true birth date is not
      known, this is yet one more tie to the birth mother that gets
      lost in the process.
    - There is a bleak prognosis when thinking about the search and
      find issues with international adoptions.  The reality is that
      many international adoptees won't be able to find their birth
      mothers, if they so desire, because of the lack of records in
      the countries from which they came.  However, it is important
      that it is not the adoptive parents that tell the adoptee that
      s/he can't find the birth mother.  Better to have the adoptee
      hear this from the adoption agency, or from the officials of
      the country where s/he came from.
    - If an adoptee is having identity issues, it may be useful for
      that child to be in therapy with someone who can be a role
      model, a Korean adoptee should preferably be seen by someone
      Korean, or from some other Asian nationality, a black adoptee
      should be seen by a black therapist, etc.
    - Only child adoptees can have a harder time because there aren't
      any siblings to identify with.  It seems easier to assimilate
      identity when there are siblings of the same race or national
      origin.
    - If possible, live in an integrated community.
    - Adoptive parents have the responsibility of keeping support groups
      going where the children/teenagers can meet others of the same
      race or country of origin.  Parents should be at these gatherings.
      It may get more difficult to get kids to go to these events when
      they hit teen years, but do whatever it takes to get them to
      participate.  Teens may not want to/feel comfortable articulating
      their feelings of isolation, 'dragging' them off to a support
      group may be what they need but are unable to ask for.
                                         
    
    There is an organization that conducts adoptee trips to Korea, for
    those of you who have children from Korea.  This fellow in Colorado
    runs this visits to Korea, and the kids must be a minimum of 16
    years of age.  I am supposed to be getting some information in the
    mail, and when it arrives I will post it in this note file.  If
    my niece wants to go to Korea when she's a little bit older, maybe
    after she completes her first year of college, I will take her on
    this trip.
    
    As for the birth father workshop, it seems that birth fathers are
    starting to get organized and many are beginning to search for their
    children.  Clearly, there are obstacles that face the birth fathers
    since they are the ones that have little or no information concerning
    the circumstances surrounding the birth and relinquishment.  In
    order to conduct a search for the child, many birth fathers must
    first search for the birth mother. And many 'found' birth mothers
    are unwilling to give information to the birth fathers.
    
    Others issues came up in terms of finding two reactions from 'found'
    birth fathers...the birth fathers either wanted little or nothing
    to do with the child, now adult, or the birth father wanted to be
    very active in the adoptee's life, making up for lost time, if you
    will, trying to compensate for not being a present father during
    the years the adoptee was growing up.
    
    Anyway, those are my two optional workshops, the other two sessions
    I was working very hard as a panelist and a panel moderator.  BTW,
    the AAC is holding its national conference in NY city in April,
    1989.  If you want a brochure about this conference, send me mail
    at PRYDE::ERVIN.
    

    Hi,
    
    Want you to know that there is a male adoptee that is willing to share
    whatever.  I realized in my late '40's that this adoption business had
    much more impact on my life than I had given it credit.  Kinda
    embarrassing, in a way, given what I do for a living (human services).
    But it has been a trip.
    
    When I first read the characteristics of adult children of alcoholics,
    I realized that many of them fit me. Whyso?  No alcoholism in my
    family (including grandparents).  I discovered that adoptees had
    been found, indeed, to have the same patterns and that, after all,
    adoptees had been BORN into a dysfunctional family.  Gee, I had
    never thought of that.  Ain't denial wonnerful?
    
    I've been working on the issues ever since.  As the issues are the
    same as ACOA/co-dependency issues, I've been using Co-dependents
    Anonymous (CoDA) as a place to work on this.  Good, relevant stuff
    with good relevant people although the "growing up" families were
    certainly different, for the most part.
    
    I'm also a life member of the American Adoption Congress and am
    very supportive of birth-parents, adopting parents, and adoptees
    getting together.  However, I haven't undertaken a search myself
    but am very interested in ferreting out, and helping others ferret
    out, the patterns of behavior and personality that have appear and
    still affect the lives of those involved.
    
    Time is not going to permit me to poke into this file frequently
    but I am available by VAX-mail and there are parallel discussions
    on adoption in the ACOA and Psychology Notesfile.
    
    The psychology file is at TERZA::PSYCHOLOGY.  Keypad 7 to add (if
    I can remember how to make that work).  For any of you that are
    birthparents, many birth parents became birthparents as a way of
    handling issues in a dysfunctional family and therefore are adult
    children of dysfunctional families (ACDF) and/or codepenents.. 
    You probably will quickly come to feel "at home" in the ACOA notesfile
    which has evolved to become a relatively safe place to work on all
    kinds of things.  As it is a restricted file, you will have to apply
    to join.  To do so send a request to MEIS::TILLSON.
    
    Jack
    
     

    Hi Jack,
    
    Glad to see you here in the =wn= adoption discussion. BTW, the keypad
    7 worked fine.
    
    Regards,
    
    Laura
    

    The discussion has settled down a bit in this topic, so
    I'd like to take a moment to share our story.  I don't feel
    entirely comfortable replying at all, as a male noter in this
    conference...but this is pretty important to me and I won't
    intrude too often.

    After years of trying to get pregnant and various levels of
    medical/spiritual help (from fertility goddeses under the bed
    to operations and attempts at 'in vitro' type fertilization), we
    decided 'enough of that' and began exploring adoption.  For
    most people, however you get to it, adoption isn't something
    you know much about.  We went to various agencies, listened to
    their introductory lectures, talked to councelors, talked to
    friends who had adopted children, and still ended up with more
    questions than we could answer.  Which agency?  How important
    are various things you might want....like adopting an infant, or
    that your child be healthy, or that it might look somewhat
    like you, or that you would prefer not to have to wait a long
    time...many years.  How can you tell if the people you are
    dealing with are ethical (you continually hear horror stories)?
    What will it cost (and how much can you afford).  What are the
    risks?  We found dealing with these questions to be very difficult.
    From an agency you get a list of hundreds of medical problems and
    you have to check which ones, if a child had that, you would not be
    willing to adopt him/her.

    This long process is just the beginning, and is all aimed at protecting
    adopted children.  Most agencies are VERY careful about the parents
    children are placed with, determining that you are ready to adopt,
    helping you work through problems like infertility and failure,
    and there to help after the placement with problems that may come up.
    On the other hand, these are 'social service' agencies, with a
    tendency toward playing 'god' with your life, competing with eachother
    for both children to place and couples to add to their lists.  They
    are not all equal and have a wide variety of philosphies.

    We finally settled on an agency and began the process....filling out
    applications, paying the application fee, getting physicals, getting
    infertility statements (not sure what happens if you 'just' want to
    adopt), writing lengthy life stories about yourselves, siblings,
    and parents, etc. etc.  Then you wait.
    
    In Massachusetts, after the application and possibly a waiting
    period that depends on how busy they are, you are assigned a social
    worker and begin a 'home study'.  This is quite a long process
    and involves a series of interviews with the adoptive couple (I have
    no experience with the process for a single parent), both together
    and separately.  Some are at your home and there are state requirements
    you have to meet, such as having a smoke detector and two exits in
    case of fire, a window in the child's bedroom, so many 'square feet'
    per child, a bed, having your water tested, getting your birth cirtificates,
    etc. etc.  After this home study, you then wait for a child to be
    placed with you.

    Just as we began the application process, we recieved a call from
    my parents in Florida.....they had heard from a friend who heard
    from a friend, and so on....there was a young woman who was interested
    in placing her child.  And, were we interested?  Of course!  And so
    we started over, trying to find out how to adopt a child from another
    state.  Our agency said 'No way, tell them you are not interested'.
    We just couldn't do this.  After much searching and confusion, we
    found an agency in Florida who knew how to make everything happen.
    This is what is called an 'identified adoption', where the birth mother
    gets to choose the adoptive couple.  She did not want to meet us (or
    or for us to meet her) but learned a lot about us.  Its high risk,
    as she can change her mind at any time.  But in this case everything
    was perfect.  3 weeks after we recieved the call from my parents,
    our son was born (on New Years Eve!).  We recieved him home (in Florida)
    from the hospital at a day old.  I had to come home (to Mass. to work)
    and Judy had stay in Florida with my folks for several months until
    the adoption was finalized.  This was very hard.  One wonderful result
    of this process is that a very special bond formed between our son and
    my folks.  We know only a little about his birthmother and think of her
    often.  I'm sure she would not be hard for him to find if he wishes to.

    We applied to the same agency in Florida for a second child and
    last spring recieved a phone call that our daughter had just been
    born.  We had expected the wait to be somewhat longer and so were
    caught completely (and wonderfully) by surprise.  This time we are
    adopting her here in Mass through a process called an interstate compact.
    Essentially this is a process that transfers custody of a child from
    one agency to another in a different state.  It is relatively simple
    but involves a paperwork maze that many agencies don't wish to deal
    with.  Molly was placed with us at about 3 days old and we are working
    with a social worker from an agency near us.  We now have two wonderful
    children and are the luckiest couple we know.

    I would be happy to talk to anyone with questions about any of this,
    either through this notes file or dec mail.

    re: .76
    
    Since you didn't sign your note, I can't welcome you to this discussion
    by name, but I do want to say welcome.
    
    Yes, this is womannotes conference, but I think that the feelings
    of 'intrusion' have more to do with replies that are not sensitive
    to the feelings/experiences of women.  In my opinion, your story
    here does not feel like an intrusion, and, at least in the discussion
    pertaining to the adoption triad, I hope you will find your way
    to feeling comfortable in participating in note #166.
    
    I think that there has been far too much secrecy and silence around
    adoption, and I didn't start this note in order to perpetuate it.
    If you have had the opportunity to read the prior 75 entries within
    this note, you will find that there are people who have questions
    about the adoption experience, and I'm sure that your experiences
    and insights will be helpful to others.
    
    In terms of an 'identified adoption', exactly what does that mean?
    If the birth mother had wanted to meet, would that have been an option?
    Does she know your name?  Do you know her name?  I've heard of 'open
    adoptions' but not 'identified adoptions'.  That's a new one on
    me.
    
    What are your opinions about adoptees searching for birth parents
    once they are majority age, or birth parents searching for adoptees,
    again, at majority age?  Or is this something that you've not given
    much thought to as yet, since, I'm assuming that your children are
    young?
    
    Anyway, I for one am glad to see another member of the triad active
    in this note.
    
    Regards,
    
    Laura
    
    

    Hi!  My name is Bob....sorry for leaving it off.  I felt that
    I had typed too much already and ended it somewhat quickly.

    I agree about secrecy!  People call us up who are having a
    frustrating experience with adoption and ask 'how did you do it?'
    We first tell them 'dumb luck' but then say we started by telling
    everyone we knew that we were interested.  for many people, they
    seem to feel 'we could never do that'.  After adopting, I find it
    amazing how many people either were adopted or have adopted children.
    
    I've read the entries.....and printed out copies of them for several
    friends and for our social worker who was very interested!!

    An 'identified adoption' is when the birth mother 'identifies' the
    adoptive parents.  It may be open or closed.  If Robin's birth mother
    had wanted to meet with us, we would have done that.  She preferred
    to remain anonymous.  There are various levels of 'open', from
    becoming friends to meeting at the agency but not exchanging names.
    Some agencies support 'identified' adoptions more than others.
    The 'old school' was that the agency had complete control.  This is
    rapidly being replaced by a variety of alternatives.  Massachusetts
    (to me) seems to have a fairly punitive attitude toward adoption.

    I think it would be hard to adopt today without thinking about the
    issues around 'searching'.  both agencies we have dealt with discussed
    it with us.  I can tell you what I think about it now and what I hope
    I will think about it 15 years from now.....we will encourage Robin
    and Molly that if they want to find their birthparents, they have our
    complete support.  We will tell them what we know.  We know much more
    about Robin'shistory than Molly's, since there was a short series of
    'friends' between us and Robin's birthmother and an agency between us
    and Molly's birthmother.  In both cases, the birthmothers did not
    know or would not tell the names of the birth father.  My fear about
    a search would be that they would end up meeting someone they did not
    wish to know or that did not want to be found.

    I guess my real fear, perhaps shared by other adoptive parents, is
    that somewhere down the road someone will come along to challenge
    my relationship with my kids.  Would an 'open adoption' lessen
    this fear?  or closed?  I don't know.  Its something I have
    to choose not to worry about but that I can't forget about.

    Reprinted without permission.
    
   Rights and Responsibilities for Everyone in the Adoption Circle
 
  by Betty Jean Lifton, from her book "Lost and Found: The Adoption 
  Experience 


I keep coming back to this issue of rights and responsibilities, for we 
cannot speak of one without the other.  Whether bound by blood or social 
ties, by an adoption or marriage contract, there are unwritten moral laws 
for the way we relate to one another in society.

Now, while everyone is groping toward a new vision, it seems a good idea to 
reexamine the stresses in the adoption circle and to consider what we can 
do to mitigate some of them.

To this end I have drafted a preliminary list of our rights and 
responsibilites to each other.

I am aware of the pitfalls of such and undertaking: that everything will 
come out drastically oversimplified.  It could be said that issues of the 
heart cannot be listed in such a pragmatic, utilitarian way.  But having 
acknowledged many of the complexities involved in the preceding pages (of 
her book), I am presuming to do so.

I wanted to see what it would look like, laid out bare like this, even 
knowing that under the best of circumstances it cannot solve all the 
problems.  The human condition is far too complex for such illusions.

This is a small list, an optimist's list, a visionary's list, but I hope 
that others will shape and expand it over the years.  Make it a working 
list.

Psychologically, this list affirms the need for an adoption system, but one 
that is more flexible and more humane.  It also assumes that people can 
change.

Legally, it is predicated on the concept of open birth and adoption records 
for those parties directly concerned.

Practically, it is dependent on certain innovations--such as the 
establishment of a central bureau in each state where all adoption records 
can be kept and updated over the years.  This would be, in effect, a 
uniform repository system that would not be subject to the ephemeral 
fortunes of adoption agencies or legal agents.  Ideally, such a bureau 
could also be responsible for maintaining a reunion registry for those 
wishing to find each other, and an intermediary service for those 
requesting it.

Realistically, this list will take some time tohappen.

However, we do not have to wait for everything suggested here to come to 
pass to relate to each other with empathy and honesty, which is, after all, 
the right and responsibility of all people who truly care for one another.


Adoptees have the right:

To know they are adopted.
To a birth certificate that has not been amended.
To knowledge of their origins--the name they were given at birth, their 
  ethnic and religious background, the complete medical and social history
  of their birth families.
To open and honest communication with their adoptive parents.
To updated medical and social history on the birth parents and their
  respective families.
To legal access to their adoption and birth records.
To personal contact with each birth parent.
To live without guilt toward either set of parents when they explore
  questions about their heritage.

Adoptees have the responsibility to:

To treat their adoptive parents as their "real" parents.
To help their adoptive parents understand their need to know their 
  heritage.
To contact their birth parents in a discreet way that will not invade their
  privacy.
To be considerate of the birth parents after contact.
To be considerate of the adoptive parents during their search and reunion
  period.

Adoptive parents have the right:

To be regarded by the child and society as the "real" parents.
To raise the child according to their social and religious background, even
  when it differs from that of the birth family.
To expect the birth parents to respect the privacy and integrity of their
  family unit, and to make contact through them or an intermediary rather
  than through a minor child.
To full information about their child at the time of adoption, and updated
  information on the birth parents over the years.

Adoptive parents have the responsibility:

To tell the child that he or she is adopted and to keep communication
  channels open after that.
To obtain all the information they can in writing about the child's 
  background at the time of adoption.
To have empathy for the child's need for knowledge about his heritage and
  to help him integrate it over the years.
To avoid inflicting feelings of indebtedness or guilt on the child.
To give the social worker or legal agent updated material on the child's
  development should the birth parents request it.
To request updated information on the birth parents over the years.
To acknowledge the possibility that the child may need to search for and
  meet the birth parents.
To have some kind of communication with a birth parent who has made
  contact either directly or through an intermediary.
To inform an adoptee of such contact.
To avoid going through black marketeers to find a child, and to be 
  certain the child's records are not falsified.
To explore open placement at the time of adoption.
To lobby in their state legislature for open records.

Birth parents have the right:

To privacy from the public, but not from their own child.
To put their own requirements into an adoption contract.
To waive their option of confidentiality at the time of adoption, or at
  any time afterward.
TO explore open adoption.
To updated information about the child's development while it is growing 
  up in the adoptive family.
To determine the time and place for meeting with a child who has searched
  for them in such a way that will preserve their privacy.
To contact a child who has reached adulthood.

Birth parents have the responsibility:

To put their child's needs before their own.
To give their child to licensed agencies or certified agents rather than
  black marketeers.
To supply the agency or legal go-between with a complete medical and 
  social history and to update this over the years.
To balance their right to information about the child with respect for the
  adoptive family.
To find some way to contact the adoptive parents of a minor child, either
  directly or through an intermediary, rather than approaching the child.
To meet with their chiild if they are contacted, and to reveal any
  relevant information, especially the identity of the other birth parent,
  siblings, or half-siblings.
To lobby in their state legislature for open records.


Social workers and legal agents have the right:

To arrange legal adoptions.
To receive reasonable fees for their professional services.
To expect state legislators to clear up the present ambiguities in the
  adoption statutes.


Social workers and legal agents have the responsibility:

To examine their own attitudes about adoption and to be trained in the
  psychology of the adoptee, the adoptive parents, and the birth parents.
To choose adoptive parents who are able to understand the psychological
  needs of the adopted child.
To keep legal fees reasonable, and to itemize costs.
TO have legal counsel representing the child at the time of the adoption
  procedures.
To consider the needs of all parties while writing the adoption contract.
To place twins and, if possbile, siblings in the same family.
To get a full medical and social history from both birth parents, as well
  as their authentic names and addresses.
To give all information in writing to the adoptive parents.
TO give updated material to all parties on request.
To  treat adoptees who contact them with courtesy, consideration, and
  honesty.
To act as an intermediary for any party requesting this service.
To get a full medical and social history on children of inter-country
  adoptions.
To lobby for controls on black market adoptions.
To lobby in state legislatures for open adoption records.
To help medical schools and schools of social work to devise courses on
  the adoption syndrome and the psychological complexity of the adoption
  circle.
To explore the advantages of open placement.

    re: .78
    
    Well, now that we know your name...
    
    Hi Bob,
    
    And again welcome to the discussion.  I appreciate your openness
    and honesty and am really glad that there is another voice
    participating in this particular topic.  Although, I am now used
    to doing alot of noting in this topic, and have received mail from
    readers who feel that this discussion is 'note worthy' even though
    they may not actively participate.
    
    I have been letting things percolate for a few days, waiting for
    someone else to respond to a couple of issues you raised.  Now I
    feel I've waited long enough, and I really want to respond to what
    you've said.
    
    RE: In terms of worrying that some day your children may search
    and find someone they do not wish to know, or someone that did not
    want to be found...well, in the support group that I go to people
    have in fact been presented with both those situations, and a variety
    of other situations that could be deemed 'not a successful search.'
    
    What I have learned from seeing these people go through the difficult
    search results is that they do get through it.  It may hurt, and
    it may be a big disappointment, but it they have loving friends
    and family to support them, they do get to the other side, and if
    nothing else, the searcher still ends up knowing more and resolving
    alot of the nagging questions.  The Adoption Connection, the
    organization that helped me do my search, has a motto:
    
    "It's not what you find, but that you have found it."
    
    In note .79 I put an entry from Betty Jean Lifton's book, and I
    was considering putting another entry in from the book concerning
    an adoptee who searched and found her birth mother in a mental
    institution.  The story was one of great courage and love, and the
    more I think about it, the more I think it will get to this conference
    one of these days...oh my aching fingers.
    
    The second thing I'd like to comment on is your very candid comments
    about your fear that somewhere down the road the birth mother/father
    would could along to challenge your relationship with your children.
    It is a valid fear and someone could come along and present the
    challenge.  The thing that I would like to respond to is through
    the eyes of the adoptee, the adoptee as a child and as an adult.
    
    As a child, I think that the issues were much more clear cut.  On
    a very simple level I had an awareness that there were these other
    people, and maybe they looked like me and maybe I looked like them.
    And there was a sense of curiosity, and maybe my curiosity was even
    greater because adoption was such a closed subject, ie. no questions
    allowed.  But even as a small child, I can't imagine that I could
    feel anything but that my adoptive parents were my parents, no matter
    who came along to challenge it.  
    
    As an adult adoptee, I think that the key to strong bonds between
    parents and children is the quality of communications.  Children
    bond to their parents at a very early age, and even though someone
    could come along and present a challenge, the big act of faith is
    to be able to trust in your parent/child bonds.  If they are in place
    then I believe that they can weather anything that comes along.
    
    I have mentioned before that even though I am the one in my family
    of two adopted kids that did the search, I am also the one that
    has the strongest bonds to my parents.  My sister, who never wanted
    to discuss the fact that she was adopted, that didn't want to tell
    her fiance that she was adopted, that would never never search for
    her origins, is also the one who has perpetually threatened my parents
    in moments of anger saying that she would walk out and never come
    back.  I can't imagine ever doing anything like that, letlone
    threatening them with something like that.  
    
    I guess, in a very round about way, I'm trying to say that if you're
    comfortable and open about adoption, your children probably will
    be too.
    
    Anyway, glad to have you here.
    
    Regards,
    
    Laura
    

    I have entered this article here, mainly in response to some of
    the discussions going on in the abortion cocerns discussion where
    there is talk about what consitutes person vs. non-person and that
    genetic technology will someday be able to bring an egg and sperm
    to a full-fledged child completely outside a woman's womb, etc...
    
    Anyway, although I feel that Betty Jean still has a significant
    portion of unresolved anger (she is an adoptee who is now in her
    mid to late 50's), I think she does raise some interesting questions
    that we, as a technocratic and legally briefed to death society
    should ponder.
    
    
    
BRAVE NEW BABY IN THE BRAVE NEW WORLD   by Betty Jean Lifton

Originially published in Woman and Health Magazine (November) and
Hawthorn Press, December, 1987

Reprinted without permission from the AAC Decree, Winter/Spring, 1988


As an adoptee, I am very glad to have been chosen (adoptees are always 
chosen and expected to be grateful) to present here on the rights of the 
embryo, or, I should say, the rights of the brave new embryo who is going 
to become the brave new baby.  In the past, I might point out, the old 
embryos and babies have had little or no rights in spite of that oft heard 
phrase "in the best interest of the child."  The best interests of the 
child always come down to the best interests of the adults involved.  In 
this case, we are referring to the adults who hope to benefit from the new 
reproductive technology that is tampering with a birth process that until 
now--when you consider the overpopulation of the world--Nature has been 
handling quite well.

I do want to make one confession; until I read about all of this wonderful 
new technology, I had thought of adopted people as very exotic.  We are 
related to Oedipus: we belong to myth.  But our brave new babies make the 
adopted seem passe.  Oedipus, after all, was conceived in an old fashion 
human scenario which involved physical love (despite the inhuman behavior 
of his parents after his birth.)

Yet, society would be wise to ponder the psychology of the adopted in order 
to gain some insights into what the psychological makeup of our brave new 
babies might be.  They have much in common.  The adoptee is a genetic 
stranger accepted into a biologically unrelated family 'as if' he were 
actually related; in other words, the adoptee is a product of social 
engineering.  Our brave new baby may be genetically related to one or both 
parents, but he will be raised 'as if' he were born to both in a natural way; 
in fact, he is a product of scientific engineering.  Both adoptee and new 
baby will share the perilous 'as if' factor, with its destructive 
by-product: secrecy.  Secrecy as the adoptee knows well, produces a feeling 
of isolation and despair in the very person whom it is meant to protect.

As I have written previously, the adoptee, by being excluded from his own 
biological clan, forced out of the natural flow of generational continuity, 
feels as if he or she has been forced out of nature itself.  He feels an 
alien, on outsider, an orphan, a foundling, a changeling--outside the 
natural realm of being.  I suggest that the brave new baby, whether created 
in vitro, by embryo transfer or by a surrogate mother, will feel the same 
sense of alienation and bewilderment when he learns the unnatural way he 
came into the world--and that some part of his heritage has been denied 
him.

Psychological studies of the adopted have revealed that it is hard to build 
a sense of self when one is raised in secrecy, when the truth about oneself 
is distorted or hidden.

Psychiatrists have found that adopted children who are confused about their 
origins suffer from "genealogical bewilderment" and "conception stress."  
Their confusion may well result in many of the symptoms seen in adoptees: 
low self esteem, lack of trust and a preoccupation with fantasy.

On the positive side: the new baby has advantages the adoptee does not: 
blood relatedness to at least one parent, if not two, and historical 
continuity with his biological clan.  But studies have shown that lack of 
knowledge about even one parent can be as damaging as lack of knowledge 
about both--and many new babies will have only one known parent.

Like the adoptee, the new baby will be assured how much he was wanted--how 
far superior he is to a blood related baby or a baby conceived in a natural 
way.  But also like the adoptee, he will have secrets of his own: he was 
second best to the child who might have been had his parents been able to 
have children in the natural way.

I keep trying to imagine what will happen when this brave new baby asks as 
Oedipus did: Who am I?  There will be no oracle to consult, no Tiresias to 
issue dire warnings, no social workers to discourage him.  Instead the 
brave new baby will have seen wild-eyed scientists in laboratories, mad 
doctors with turkey syringes, tight-lipped lawyers with legal briefs.  Like 
the adoptee, the brave new baby will find that the truth of his missing 
origins are sealed: perhaps in a sperm bank, or, if he is of a surrogate 
born, in the vital statistics archive where the original birth certificates 
of adoptees moulder away.  It is possible--and this is the most 
tragic--that false name may have been given or records not kept.

Other questions will surface after the brave new baby utters his first Who 
Am I?  Who is my real mother?  Who is my real father?  Who is the authentic 
mother?  Who is the authentic fahter?  Must a real mother be genetically 
related?  Does a man have the right to detach himself without 
responsibility from his sperm?  And, not least of all, the question with 
which adoptees are still struggling: Is genetic relatedness necessary for 
an authentic sense of self?

Of course, our brave new baby will have a few unique questions in his or 
her scenario: What is he learns tha his mother's egg and father's sperm met 
in a saucer and shacked up in a stranger's womb?  Would that woman in whose 
womb he was implanted, on whose body fluid he fattened, on whose umbilical 
cord he clung, but to whome he was not genetically related, be a stranger, 
or would she be his mother?  What if he learns that his father took money 
as an anonymous donor to a sperm bank or paid money to have his sperm 
impregnate an anonymous woman?  Would that child feel anonymous or unborn, 
as many adoptees do?

What if he learns that he had a surrogate mother who carried him for a 
price in her womb and gave him up like a piece of merchandise after he was 
born?  Could she be called a mother, or even human?  Would he see her as 
less than human--less human than a glass jar?

Surrogate mothers differ from birth mothers who surrender their children 
for adoption in that they make a calculated business deal from the 
beginning.  The usual birht mother was young, unmarried and pressured by 
her family to give up her baby for adoption.  Studies show that these women 
often suffer from depression for the rest of their lives.  Concerned United 
Birth Parents, a national group organized in the last decade, has been 
fighting to dispel the societal myth that all birth parents want privacy: 
they want the legal right to know what happened to their children.  
Adoptees are usually able to forgive their birth mothers when they learn 
the true story behind their relinquishment.  But the question is--can our 
brave new baby ever forgive a surrogate mother?

Unless all surrogate mothers prove to be like Marybeth Whitehead who, as of 
this writing, is still in court fighting like a tigress to keep her 
baby--know nationally as Baby M--our brave new surrogate babies are going 
to have a lot of feelings of rage--and a sense of worthlessness.  Whatever 
the judge decides is in the best interest of Baby M--to stay with her 
father, William Stern, and to be adopted by his wife, or to return to her 
mother, Marybeth Whitehead and her husband, Baby M's best interests will nt 
be served.  As in adoption cases, she will be cut off from one half of her 
heritage unless a custody arrangement is worked out in which she has the 
right to know both her mother and her father while she is growing up.  If 
Marybeth Whitehead's legal rights are terminated, as birthmothers' are in 
adoption cases, then Baby M will be the loser--as are all adoptees in the 
present closed adoption system--in that she will not be able to integrate 
the truth of her heritage while she is growing up.  Like many adoptees, she 
may act out her anger and grief in her adolescence or young adulthood.
    
In spite of the perils inherent in surrogate contract, as illustrated by 
the Baby M case, most states are already working on legislation that would 
safeguard such arrangements by having the mother's rights legally 
terminated before the birth of the baby.  Better interview techniques have 
been suggested to insure that only those women who can easily give up a 
child be selected.  But what kind of woman can easily give up a child?  And 
what kind of society wants to encourage this kind of woman?

The questions are endless: we will need a new vocabulary to answer them.  
In the adoption world there is already a vocabulary war.  Adoptive parents 
insist upon calling the mothers who gave birth to the child the biological 
mother rather than the natural mother, because the latter would imply that 
they be called the birth mother because the term biological does not sound 
human or caring.  Surely the reproductive technology revolution will 
produce, along with babies, new terminology to battle over: the sperm 
donor, the genetic parent, the gestation parent, the surrogate uterus, the 
surrogate mother, the psychological mother and the genetic mother.

Whatever combination and definitions we make, I hope we will at least 
relinquish the secrecy that has been the scourge of the adoption system, 
that we will be open and honest with this brave new baby.  And however our 
baby makes it into this world--frozen, fertilized, implanted or 
transplanted--I hope he or she will grow up to be a writer or artist who 
can depict for us not only what it is like in the wine dark sea or a rented 
womb, but what the world looks like through the crystalline clarity of a 
glass test tube.

    Laura, most of the articles you've entered deal mostly with the
    person who was adopted blind -- raised by two people who didn't
    know the child beforehand, given up by a mother who never saw or
    knew about the child again. 
    
    How much do you think the issues and emotions of adoption apply to
    someone who's half-adopted, like my daughter?  She's never met her
    birth father, and hasn't decided yet if she wants to. I've told
    her what I can about him, trying not to prejudice her against him,
    but there's no hiding the fact that he left us because he couldn't
    deal with her existence.  I know she has some bad feelings about
    it and doesn't want to talk to me about them, I suppose because
    I'm part of those feelings, but she doesn't want to talk to
    someone outside who's been through adoption, either.  
    
    

    Bonnie,
    
    I personally haven't had adoptee friends in this particular situation.
    However, from things I've read and just from a gut guess (if you
    will), I think that the sense of genetical isolation or confusion
    would be less in your daughter's case.  For instance, she knows
    who her biological mother is, you, and has been raised by you with
    the extended family that potentially goes with it (aunts, uncles,
    cousins, grand-parents).  Plus, if she wanted to, she has the *option*
    to know more about her birthfather.  I think it makes a big difference
    if we feel we *can't* have access to our own information or that
    the details are being legally sealed off from us.  To *choose* not
    to know more (when clearly she could have access to information)
    has got to give her more of a sense of control over the circumstances
    surrounding separation from her birthfather.  Most 'classical' adoptees
    don't really have any sense of control over their birth facts.
    
    I think the age of the child makes a difference.  You didn't mention
    your daughter's age.  Also, if she has just recently come to really
    understand what it means to have a parent 'walk out and not look
    back' then she will need to work through a lot of anger towards
    him before she'd ever be ready to think about meeting him.  If she's
    not ready to talk about the issue, with you or with another adoptee,
    then she's probably doing a lot of personal processing.  
    
    Sometimes when I talk to my niece (on my SO's side of the family), I
    can raise a topic related to adoption and get no response from her.
    And then, maybe 2 -3 weeks later I'll bring the same concept up
    again, and then she's ready to talk about it.  It's like she needs
    some time to work it, or maybe she doesn't want to respond to hastily
    as to not say something  that she would consider 'dumb' in front
    of the adult.
    
    Clearly, your daughter probably feels that she can have access to
    the information, but as part of our adoptee control issues, it's
    going to be on her terms and when she's ready.  
    
    If you give me a few more details I may be able to give you a more
    accurate assessment.  The whole adoption thing and the feelings
    that it generates is just so complex that it is difficult to analyze
    the situation without knowing more.  
    
    On a side note, I feel that I'm right up to my eyeballs with serious
    and painful adoptee issues.  My niece attempted suicide last week.
    It doesn't surprise me.  It came right on the heels of her having
    a second trimester abortion.  The biggest problem is that I'm 1100
    miles away from where she lives and can only do so much via phone
    and letters.
    
    In spite of all this, I still don't feel that there is a problem
    with the concept of adoption, but there is a BIG problem with how
    we do adoptions.
    

    Bonnie,
    
    From your first note, I would have made a guess that your daughter
    was in her teens.  It helps to have that confirmed.  Clearly, the
    teen years are probably the most turbulent when it comes to identity
    issues.
    
    For myself, I can remeber sort of drifting in and out of the process,
    wanting to know about my heritage and then sort of drifting away
    from the need to know.  In my case, at that age, it seemed far more
    unlikely that I would or could have access to the information.
    
    Given your daughter's age, I would gather that she is figuring out
    exactly what an absent birthfather means.  She may have her own
    ideas (fantasies) about it, even though you have told her the facts
    of what happened.  There are times when it is easy to make our
    birthparents into villains, and then other times they are heros.
    
    In the final analysis, I believe that the most important factor
    is for her to make peace with the *facts* of her life, which means
    letting go of any fantasies she may have conjured up as a small
    child.  Follow her lead, to a certain point.  There may be times
    when she is more willing to discuss things than other times.
    
    It is o.k. to keep the communication channels open by raising the
    subject when it seems appropriate.  She may brush off the opportunity
    to talk about the details, or you may catch her at a point where
    it's easier for her to jump in and pursue it.
    
    I think, where possible, it is better for you not to project your
    feelings toward her birthfather and present him in neutral terms.
    By doing this, your daughter can have her own feelings rather than
    taking on yours out of loyalty or other such reasons.  I am quite
    sure that without any prompting, your daughter will have anger towards
    her birthfather to work through.  It is o.k. for her to have this
    anger, and it is o.k. for her to resolve the anger and she needs
    to know that both situations are o.k.  In other words, if you are
    invested in her staying angry with her birthfather, then she would
    probably pick up on this and have a much more difficult time working
    through the feelings that really belong to her vs. projections of
    your feelings.                                        
    
    My own niece started hitting the big time turbulence with her own
    adoption issues around age 14 or so.  Granted, the circumstances
    are different, my niece is a Korean adoptee in a white, middle class
    family in Minnesota. But I think that from my own and others
    experiences, the 14 - 15 age bracket is when we all started making
    our attempts to integrate the various pieces that make up our
    complicated identies.
    
    I will check some of my book resource listings and see if there
    is anything that addresses the specifics of your adoption where
    one parent is the biological parent and one is not.
    
    Also, please feel free to extract anything that I have entered into
    this note string that you feel would be of help to your daughter.
    
    Regards,
    
    Laura
    

    Thanks, Laura. 
    
    I have tried my best to keep my anger at Kat's father out of what
    I tell her about him.  Jim Baranski helped me work through some of
    those issues last year -- thanks, Jim, if you're still reading --
    so I can accept that fact that he is her father and that anything
    she wants to develop in relation to him has nothing to do with me
    or with Neil.  And I hope I don't expect her to carry on my anger,
    though it would be foolish to deny that if I stop to think about
    it, I'm still mad at him for the way he walked out.  But I've been
    around enough now to know it was the social role of
    young-father-and-breadwinner he walked out on -- and I can't
    really blame him for that. 
    
    Anyway, I'll try to keep the channels of communications open.
    That's about all you can do at this age anyway. . . 
    
    Maybe I'll log on from home and let her read these notes and
    see if she finds anything that helps her.  Thanks.
    
    --bonnie

Reprinted without permission from Child Welfare, Volume LXVII, Number I
January - February, 1988


     Why Adoptees Search: Motives and More  by Robert S. Andersen

Lights, camera, action.  On comes the television camera as our local ALMA 
(Adoptee Liberty Movement Association) chapter records a staged ALMA 
meeting for the benefit of the local television audience.  Jim starts the 
meeting by asking if anyone would like to tell why adoptees search.  David 
volunteers and he proceeds to say that adoptees often search in order to 
obtain medical information.  David feels it is important that adoptees have 
such information so that they might know if there is a family history of 
"cancer or something worse."  I think that this type of answer to the 
question as to why adoptees search reflects on a tragic aspect of the 
adoptee situation, an aspect that we would do well to consider.

The nature or extent of problems related to adoption in not always easy to 
ascertain.  The tragic part (which I do not believe to be an 
overstatement) lies not with the fact that one might not know his or her 
own medical history.  Rather, the difficulty lies with the associated 
premises that cause one to give such an answer.  Let me try to explain.

First I wish to consider briefly the actual medical importance for adoptees 
of not knowing their family medical history.  In general, by the time one 
is old enough to consider searching he or she is already too old to develop 
most of the monogenic (one gene - one disease) hereditary diseases.  Also, 
it is unlikely that the healthy adoptee would pass on such a disorder to 
any children.  Familial disorders (polygenic) are found in every human 
pedigree, but there is little evidence to suggest that a knowledge of such 
family medical history significantly improves diagnostic or treatment 
capabilities over and above what one can achieve by following good general 
health practices without such knowledge.  I do not mean to say that the 
family medical history is unimportant, but it is not important enough to be 
given by adoptees as the number one reason for searching.  Knowledge of 
family medical history might influence certain medical judgements, but a 
physician is not going to throw up his hands in despair upon finding out 
that the adoptee is ignorant of his or her family medical history.  In 
almost all medical decisions, the value of the family medical history is 
insignificant when compared to the value of the individual's personal 
medical history, the symptom review, laboratory tests, and the physical 
examination.

To pursue my point I need to consider briefly some aspects of the nature of 
questions and the interrogatory form.  Point one: questions are not always 
questions.  "Can you tell me what time it is?" most probably is an 
informational question asing for time, but "DO you know what time it is?!!" 
said in a huff is not a query about the hour but rather an injunction to 
get moving.  Point two: some questions make no sense in normal dialogue and 
only make sense when asked from a philosophic point of view (e.g., How do 
we know we exist?).  The following three situations include questions that 
make no sense in normal human dialogue:

1. An anxious mother asking about the just concluded opeation on her 
   ten-year-old daughter:

   Mother: How did the operation go, doctor?
   Doctor: Why do you want to know?

2. Two friends in high school both trying out for varsity baseball:

   Kevin: I just saw the roster the coach posted as to who made the team.
   Paul: Well, did we make it?
   Kevin: Why, are you interested?

3. Child applying to medical school:

   Mother: There is a letter here from the admission department of Stanford
           University Medical School. Do you want me to open it?
   Child: Yes, please do.
   (Mother opens letter.)
   Child: Well, what does it say?
   Mother: Why do you want to know?

The final questions in these dialogues are absurd.  The behavior is 
self-evident and it is not necessary to inquire about motivation.  One 
would not bother to answer such a question--incredulousness, silence, or 
hostility would be more in order.

What then about the question as to why the adoptee is searching?  This 
question can, I believe, be paraphrased thus: "Why are you interested in 
your mother, your father, your grandparents, brother, sisters, cousins, 
nephews, nieces, ancestry, history, proclivities, aptitudes, liabilities -- 
in short, why are you interested in you?"  To this question the adoptee 
gives a direct, unquestioned response.  Why?  Is this not an absurd 
question?  How does it differ from any of the questions above?  The search 
question does not a demand a response, at least not an informational one.  
"Are you out of your mind?" might be an appropriate response, but not "I am 
interested in finding out some medical history so that I might be better 
able to monitor the health of my newborn child."  How timid!  How 
deferential adoptees are!  How low is their sense of legitimacy that they 
have to offer up such absurdities in view of such an affront!  This is the 
tragedy -- that adoptees more often than not do not feel justified in 
living life as it is, but have to come up with socially acceptable excuses 
to justify their interests, their needs, their lives.  They cannot be 
honest with themselves or others because othe conflictual forces, external 
if in the form of "how could you do this to your adoptive parents," or 
internal if in the form of "she gave me up and I do not want to give her 
the satisfaction of knowing that it matters," interfere with the living of 
life from their own authentic position.

The question "Why do you search?" is generally not meant as a genuine 
request for information.  It is generally an injunction and most often can 
be neatly paraphrased as "After all that your adoptive parents have done 
for you, how can you hurt them by expressing an interest in your biological 
parents?"  It could also mean, "Have you no pride! Your biological mother 
did not care about you so why should you care about her?"; or it could 
mean, "You know this is going to upset you and everyone around you and I 
object to your continuing with it"; or, "You better not search because you 
might find something too appalling to handle"; or, "Prove to us that you 
have a compelling reason that would cause us to open your records"; and so 
on.  There are many possible meaning when the question is really an 
admonition, as it usually is.

Why do adoptees respond as they do?  Giving medical history as a response 
is favored not because it is the central reason informationally, but 
because it is the least offensive politically.  Adoptees can be seen as 
ungrateful if they have a personal interest in their natural relatives, but 
who can be faulted for wanting to protect the health of their children?  
Adoptees give the medical history reason not because it is the most 
significant, but because it evokes the least criticism.

Adoptees do want to know their medical histories, of course, but wanting to 
know medical history is not their central motivation for searching.  They 
desire something more, and it is conflict about this other desire that 
causes the real difficulties.  Casting the search as just for information 
is easier on everyone involved (at least initially).  I have heard some say 
that they were searching because they had an interest in genealogy and just 
wanted to fill in their own pedigrees.  Again, such an answer strips the 
search of many of its most problematic aspect -- the hurt, the anger, the 
frustrated love, the relationship that never was to be between biological 
family and child.  All of these aspects are understated in one is just 
filling out genealogical charts.

My own history adds a slight variation to this otherwise familiar pattern, 
which essentially emphasizes the intellectual at the expense of the 
emotional.  When I started searching I put it to myself that I had a 
professional interest in adoption and merely needed information about my 
own past so that I could expand my professional knowledge.  Using myself as 
an example, it has become patently clear to me that searching involves much 
more that just filling in gaps in professional information.  There is an 
emotional component that is much more compelling, and much less easy to 
confront.  If today, in tranquil moments, I reflect on why I search (i.e., 
the search question qua question), I approach the truth with the response 
that I seem to have a compelling need to know my own story.  It is a story 
that I should not be excluded from since it is at least partly mine, and it 
seems vaguely tragic and somehow unjust that it remains unknown to me.  But 
this reflection also fails to fully encompass the emotional component.  
There are moments in my life and probably in the lives of most adoptees 
when the magnitude of what adoption entails is fully appreciated.  Those 
moments are painful and not long endured, but at those times it seems clear 
to me that the search is at base an expression of the frustrated wish to 
make contact with the only person(s) who could most fully be what she 
(they) was (were) -- our mother (families).

Searching is not simply an intellectual activity.  There is an emotional 
component to searching as well, and it is my belief that this emotional 
component is the most important part.  If one genuinely wonders why 
adoptees search I think that a comprehensive answer must include the 
following: On one level, adoptees search so that they might see, touch, and 
talk to their biological mother -- the search is an effort to make contact 
with one's biological family.  On a different level, (the bottom line), it 
is something more than this.  I think that the search is most fundamentally 
an expression of the wish to undo the trauma of the separation.  Adoptees 
either hope (unrealistically, but not thereby necessarily unexpectantly) to 
relive the life that was lost at the time of the separation, or hope (more 
realistically) to heal the wound caused by the separation, and therby to 
provide a more authentic base for living their lives.

The medical history, the genealogies, the professional informational 
aspects to searching are all valid, but are not central when compared to 
the wish for contact and healing.  To the degree that we hear adoptees say 
that the search is just to obtain medical information, we have a measure of 
the intensity of forces that have distorted their sense of identity -- 
forces that it should be our business to try to understand, and if possible 
to change.


Robert S. Andersen, M.D., is a Psychiatrist and an adoptee.

    re: 166.87 "Why Adoptees Search: Motives and More"
    
    Laura,
    
    I found this article thought-provoking but a little hard to take. Part
    of it may have been the author's tone. I was surprised that he chose to
    speak for all adoptees. What I understand from the article is that he
    started his search thinking he had one set of motives and ended up
    realizing that he was operating under another set. And now he's
    ascribed his feelings to all adoptees who search. His conclusion may be
    valid, but his sample size seems awfully small. 
    
    I was also puzzled by his reaction to the question "why do you search".
    As a non-adoptee, I found it interesting to hear why you, Laura, had
    chosen to search. I recall being curious and interested; it was
    something I'd never thought about. Does that mean that deep down I was
    really admonishing you for being disloyal to your family? Does it mean
    that by asking, I was insulting you? And does it mean that we need to
    stop being curious about each others' lives, that we need more distance
    from one another, in order to preserve one another's sense of dignity?
        
    Curious and interested in hearing more,
    Liz

    re: .88
    
    Liz,
    
    You have raised some very interesting questions.  I realize how
    different experiences can create different responses to something
    like the article I posted in note .87.  For instance, when I read
    that article for the first time, I identified immediately.
    
    I think that the author's involvement in ALMA and exposure to a
    variety of adoptees' experiences, including his own, would give
    him a pretty good idea of the adoptee experience.  He is stating
    his opinion as a belief more that a scientific fact.  He is writing
    from the vantage point of an adoptee who has grappled with those
    sticky loyalty issues..."if I think about my birth parents am I
    going to hurt/be disloyal to my adoptive parents?"  Also, adoptees
    growing up have been fed alot of 'gratitude' stuff, so the whole
    idea of searching is a fairly loaded issue.
    
    I really identified with what he was trying to present as the tone
    of how people ask the question of adoptees..."why do you want to
    search?"  You, Liz, and other friends, have asked me that question
    in a loving, supportive manner, with a genuine interest in
    understanding my needs to know as an adoptee.  But that question,
    "why do you want to search?" is not always asked ith compassion.
    
    In many, many cases it is asked in a tone and manner that is meant
    to admonish us, to intimidate us, to get us to give up the idea
    of search.  I vividly remember my first and last trip to the probate
    court in Springfield, MA.  I remember the contempt with which I
    was treated by the court clerk and the probate judge.  When they
    asked, "why do you want to know?" it was not done in a caring way,
    it was done in a way that was meant to put me in my place, to convey
    the fact that *they* had power over my information, not me.  I felt
    as if I had walked up to the counter and told them that I was a
    leper.  And I remember that my response to that judge and probate
    court clerk was, "I want to get some medical information." 
    
    That response was total b.s. coming from a person who was totally
    intimidated by the situation.  I couldn't say that for as long as
    I could remember I wanted to meet the woman who had given birth
    to me.  I think the point about 'medical' records being an unpolitical
    response is right on.  I really hadn't thought about it in that
    way before, even though subconsciouly I had been acting like that
    for years.      
    
    There is a very interesting book about a woman named Florence Fisher.
    It is her story about her search for her biolgical family.  It is
    a book that can be read in an afternoon, and I think it might shed
    some light on the phenomenon of the "why" questions and how they
    can be phrased in a way that is hostile and intimidating for the
    searcher.  I would be happy to loan you the book.
    
    I have been asked the "why" question in ways that were meant to
    say..."how dare you do this to your parents..." and I have been
    asked the "why question in ways that were genuinely supportive.
    I have never felt insulted or admonished by you.  There is a big
    difference.              
    
    For me, as I read the article, I understood exactly the kinds of
    questions that he was getting at.  Perhaps, for the non-adoptee
    he did not really make it clear what he was getting at.  Hope this
    clarifies things a bit for you.
    

    Laura,
    
    Thanks for your response. It's interesting that you can identify with
    this article, but I walked away feeling very puzzled. i've often read
    notes/articles by people with a difference who say "why do people _ask_
    questions like that? it's so rude" or "why _don't_ people ask those
    questions -- are they blind?" i often feel that i'm just on the wrong
    side of invading someone's privacy, or conversely, of not acknowledging
    an obvious part of their lives. 
    
    liz

    Liz and Laura,
    
    For me, the question of "why do you search" is a perfectly valid
    question, if it is a question.  As I know you know, "Why" questions are
    frequently phony; they frequently are masked statements of disapproval.
    When I get one of those critters, along with the disapproving tone, I
    ask, "you got a statement behind that question?"
    
    I don't remember what has been said before, this may be repetitive.
    However, while the search issues are very popular, my own personal
    interest has to do with how my being adopted is continuing to effect
    my life on a moment-to-moment basis.  I find that much of my behavior,
    attitudes, and beliefs, particularly about relationships, is colored
    by the fact that I have a formal and emotional membership in a legally
    constituted family and a physical and emotional membership in at
    least five other families, one of which is not legally recognized
    and none of which acknowledge me.  Those families are my mother's
    biological family of origin, her family of creation, my father's
    family of origin, my father's created family, and my biological
    family that existed long enough to conceive me.
    
    I, and fellow adoptees, are *associate* members of the world--not full
    members. As a result, there is always a level at which I feel that I
    truly do not belong anywhere.  This, I now recognize, has been subtly
    operating throughout my life in both positive and negative ways.
    It has been very positive in terms of a career choice.  I am in
    a profession in which I can have many intimate (not sexual)
    relationships with many people on a temporary basis and lends well
    to the role of consultant.  In my more long term, committed
    relationships such as father, husband, and friend, there is a way
    I always hold some part of me back.
    
    Jack
     
    
    Jack

    re: .91
    
    Nicely put, Jack,
    
    I think that in his article, Robert Andersen perhaps blurred the
    lines a bit between the why questions that are o.k. and the why
    questions that you termed as "phony" and "masked statements of
    disapproval." 
    
    The 'associate' member of the world concept and the feelings of
    not belonging anywhere hit home for me.  In fact, everything you
    wrote in the last paragraph hit like a ton of bricks.
    
    I have just recently come to an awareness of how I operate in intimate
    relationships and why it has always been so difficult to maintain
    intimacy on a long term basis.  There has always been for me a giant
    sense of loss, a void that I longed to fill.  I think there was
    some illusion or delusion that 'relationships' or one special
    relationship would fill that void, make up for the loss, make me
    feel like a whole person.
    
    This time of year has been terrible for me since I learned of my
    birth mother's death (and this was the time of year when I received
    that information).  It's almost like clock work, I start getting
    restless, I want to be some one else, some place else, I can't really
    connect with my SO.  But the realization that I have come to this
    year is that the sense of loss, the void that always is, will always
    be a part of my life.  It isn't going to go away.  There isn't anything
    or anyone that can make those feelings change.  I suppose the
    difference now, the work that lies ahead, is coming to an acceptance
    that these feelings are, and to learn to peacefully coexist with
    them.  I suppose that it has always been wishful thinking to think
    that anything could replace such a fundamental and intimate
    loss in my life.           
    
    Laura
    

    -.1 Laura
    
    I can think of two choices re those old feelings and thoughts that
    I created as a result of my birth.
    
    First option: I can take charge of my life and not let them run me.  I
    don't have to coexist with them by taking charge.  While they won't go
    away, they can fade into memory and not consume my energy.
    
    Second option: I can admit I am powerless over them and cannot manage
    my life when the old feelings/thoughts are running the show.  That
    doesn't mean to resign, but to be active in recognizing when they are
    in charge.  I'm finding Co-dependents Anonymous helpful in this regard. 
    
    These sound like opposite options, but they are not.  I use them
    both.  I feel stronger in my life as a result and less buffeted
    about like a victim. 
    
    Because I don't get into this file very often, please send me a
    mail message if you enter a reply and would like to hear back from
    me.
    
    Jack
    

    I haven't had time to read through all the responses but fet I *HAD*
    to give my version. Both my brother and I are adopted. My mom couldn't
    have children. I've known I was adopted since I can remember. In
    my mind that's the *ONLY* way to go. Honesty is the best policy.
    My parents even told me and my brother about sex when we where very
    young (that's a different story).  I think I'ld have trouble if
    I found out 20 years later that I was adopted, wouldn't anyone?
    
    I'm very proud to be an adopted child. I have the best parents anyone
    could ask for. There's a bit of magic tho, it's called LOVE. I don't
    care if your adopted or "homegrown" if your not brought up in a
    loving family then you're going to be a "problem child". It's love
    and *NOT* genes that make a family work. If a parent makes the child
    feel like he/she will be sent away if bad, then of course the child
    will grow up with emotional troubles adopted or not.
       
    My dad's mom was adopted, she came off on of those orphan trains
    and wasn't adopted by the most "loving" parents, but she came out
    just fine.
    
    Neither my brother nor I have any desire to find our "biological"
    parents. As a matter a fact I think my mom is more curios then me.
    :-)
    
    I love my parents, they love me it doesn't matter if we don't share
    the same genes. We share something stronger and that our love.
    
    If your think of adopting, please feel free to talk to me.
    
    Shannon

    Shannon, thanks so much for your wonderful note.  Our kids also
    will just always know they were adopted and may be suprised that
    everyone else isn't.

    You're right.....love is the magic that makes it all work!

    bob

    
    re: .94
    
    Hi Shannon,

Welcome to the discussion.  I hope that you will find time to contribute 
more to this discussion; more about your own story and perhaps some 
insights on your feelings about not searching.

So much of what has been entered into this note string has to do with 
search stories, that I, for one, welcome your perspective in terms of not 
having a desire to search.  So I hope you will feel comfortable sharing 
your thoughts.

I think your comment about love being the critical element in making a 
family 'work' is right on.  I know plenty of people who were brought up in 
their 'biological' family and don't feel like they had any family life.

I'm not sure that growing up in a family without love automatically ensures 
that the child/children will be problem children or that they will grow up 
with emotional troubles.  I was also wondering if you were assuming that 
adoptees that search all grew up in un-loving families?  For me, feeling a 
part of my family and the need to search for my roots are two separate 
issues.  Perhaps you could expand on this some more.

As for your father's mother, your grandmother, who was adopted in the era 
of 'orphan trains' as you mentioned in your note, I would like to offer the 
general population an explanation of the orphan trains.

In the late 1800's and early 1900's, city kids who had been orphaned were 
in fact sent by train to the mid-west and west to live on the farms 
and homesteads as extra help.  Many of these children (ranging in all 
different ages) were adopted by the families that they lived with.  Some of 
the children sent west were sent with the original intention of being 
adopted, other adoptions happened after the child had been with a family 
for a while.  

So originally, adoption was an economic issue.  Placement of these children 
was good for the farmers/homesteaders and good for the orphanages because 
it reduced the number of children they had to house and feed.

Jean Paton, who is considered the founding mother of the adoption rights 
movement, writes about these 'adoptions of convenience' in her book, Orphan 
Voyage.  

I will look up the reference and post more information re: the orphan 
trains in a different note.  I don't want to digress too much from the
original intention of this note, which is to welcome you, Shannon.

Regards,

Laura
           

Reprinted without permission from Orphan Voyage by Jean Paton.

Jean's book was originally published in 1955.  The exerpt that follows is 
from the chapter entitled, The Arrival of the Infants.


Almost any morning one can look into the paper and read of the arrival of 
several war orphans--usually Korean--and of their adoption by American 
couples, many of whom come to meet the boat on which the children arrive.  
How deeply we are stirred when we think of the fortune that has befallen 
these little ones who need never again see their native land or its 
poverty, or the destruction which has taken place in it, but who are now 
assured of a special niche in the American culture, and usually of material 
advantages beyond the average.  Certainly there are many toys awaiting 
them, and a nursie, and many curious relatives, friends, and neighbors.  
Perhaps there will also be a little orphan in the house next door.

For over a century we have been doing this in America.  Not only have we 
accepted the emigrant European family, but also the orphaned European child 
who arrived here almost at once parentless if not orphaned before arrival.

As to how this may have influenced local practices which eventually 
developed into adoption, there is, for example, the fact that in 
Pennsylvania children were bound out after settlement of intact families 
proved too expensive--an old question of economics that is still with us 
today.  New York State used the indenture on a wide scale with parentless 
children even into the early 1900's.

Another type of disaster and a far more extensive one was the Irish Potato 
Famine.  It came in the 1800's, and culminated in the severe crop failures 
of the middle century.  Accounts are plentiful and vivid of the immigration 
of Irish families and children to Canada, the United States, and as far 
away as South Africa.  The strains of industrial development made 
themselves felt about the same time in England so that from these two 
sources came a stream of older children, to Canada, in particular.  A few 
accounts follow:

"The emigrant vessels to the united States were becoming plague ships, in 
which the victims, closely packed and already weakened by hunger, succumbed 
long before they reached the shores of the New World...On their arrival in 
America, thousands of them, thrown out upon the streets without money and 
ignorant of any trade or calling, sank into the purlieus of the great 
cities and fed the taverns and the gaols."

As to the English experience, many children were taken in and reared by Dr. 
Barnardo's homes where 82,126 were helped between 1866 and the close of 
1915, and of these, 25,779 children were sent across the Atlantic for 
distribution in Canadian families.

A still further influence was the Civil War.  The land was full of 
soldiers' widows and fatherless children when the New England Home for 
Little Wanderers opened its doors on May 23, 1865.  Children first gathered 
into orphanages burst them to their seams, until the expedient of sending 
them to the Middle West was hit upon.

The movement grew and became organized, with a development that was 
transformed into today's Children's Aid Socieities and the associated 
efforts.  Charles Loring Brace of the New York Children's Aid Society 
became the principal organizer and apologist of emigration, and through 
this agency passed many children committed to it by other agencies for this 
particular purpose, though many homes and agencies had their own "Western 
Agencies" and made their own placements.

Mr. Brace himself said:

"Little companies of emigrants are formed under the care of a competent 
agent.  These children are brought to us from various sources, the majority 
being orphans placed in our charge by the infant asylums and homes, the 
House of Refuge, and other institutions.  These children have been 
carefully selected by our agent with reference to their fitness for homes 
among the kindhearted people of the West...Under this system these homeless 
waifs find themselves in comfortable and kind homes, with all the boundless 
advantages and opportunities of the Western farmer's life about them."

The apologist for this system was, as stated, Mr. Brace, who said, at the 
Third International Conference in London:

"...the demand in the country for boys of all ages is equally great...There 
is a certain largeness and generosity in the West that opens the hearts of 
the people to these homeless orphans, and gives the boys a better standing 
than they would have elsewhere...The cost (to send the child West) was $35
each, and when this is compared with the enormous expense it would be to 
care for these same children in an orphanage for a term of years at $120 
per annum, it is apparent that economy, as well as good sense, underlies 
the system...There is a divinely-given uplifting power in humanity which 
overcomes bad heredity, provided the child is removed from evil environment 
early in life, and is of sound mind and body."

Now we are about to have an opportunity of seeing at close hand what 
happened in one tiny spot, near Menominee, Michigan, in 1892.  By then the 
transportation of children had been going on for a long time and was 
well-seasoned.

It so happened that on the morning of Thursday, December 15, 1892, a 
trainload of children from the New York Foundling Hospital arrived in 
Marinet, Wisconsin.  The following account is taken from the Menominee, 
Michigan "Democrat" dated Saturday, December 17, 1892:

"The morning train on the Chicago and Northwestern, Thursday brought 
twenty-one little chubby infants to be distributed among different families 
in Marinette and Menominee.  When the train arrived at Marinette there was 
quite a large gathering at the depot to see the little ones.  They were 
healthy-looking, happy babies, and seemed quite content in each other's 
company.  It was interesting to watch the people who were to be presented 
with infants.  They would hand their tickets to the man in charge and then, 
after going through the entire number, perhaps the duplicate would be 
found, and it was then that a surprised and delighted look would dart 
across the face of the intended mother.  The children were all between the 
age of 2 and 5."

If the reader wishes to bring things up to date, the following account is 
offered for his consideration.  It is taken from the Los Angeles Times, for 
December 18, 1956:

"Christmas babies from Korea arrived in Los Angeles by airplane yesterday 
to be welcomed into the arms of Southland families who adopted them through 
the efforts of a farmer in Creswell, Oregon. The children...were flown down 
from San Francisco after a scary Pacific flight...There were 40 in the 
group...The scene at International Airport was one of joyous bedlam, with 
tired toddlers occasionally bursting into wails and their new parents 
frantically trying to match them up with snapshots..."

    Here is a conference for ANYONE at all interested in
    the issue of Adoption...if you have any questions, I can
    try to answer them.

    The Sixteenth Annual New England Adoption Conference, sponsored
    by ODS, the Open Door Society, will be held Saturday, May 6
    from 8AM to 5PM.  It will be held at Milford High School.

    For information about the conference, contact Joan Clark,
    Conference director, 508-429-4469 or ODS Western Mass, at
    413-486-9869.  This conference is by advance registration only,
    NO REGISTRATION AT THE DOOR.  I suggest registering early.
    The registration deadline is April 22.

    To my knowledge, this is THE conference in New England for issues
    around adoption.  To quote some of the opening remarks in
    the brochure..."Last year conference registration had to be closed
    at 1300, with over 200 (people) turned away.  We hope that the move
    to a larger facility will make it possible to accomodate all who
    wish to attend.

    "Our appreciate is extended to over 100 volunteers who have continued
    to support and improve this conference.  These volunteers are
    adoptive parents and adoption professionals who share with ODS
    the desire to provide an educational forum about adoption for
    prospective adopters, adoptive parents, adoptees and professionals.

    "This year, twenty new workshops have been added, so even those who
    have attended the conference in previous years will be able to find
    some new topics from which to choose.  The Board of ODS and the
    Conference Committee hope that you will be able to join us for a 
    day of information about the life long experience of adoption."

    ODS is a non-profit support and educational group of adoptive, foster
    and pre-adoptive parents and professionals interested in adoption.

    Here are some of the workshops (I am not typing in all of them....
    there are pages of them).  In addition to these, there are exhibits
    by adoption agencies, ODS, and other support groups and organizations
    and services of interest to adoptive families.

    Adoption Information - for prospective adoptive parents

    Phychological issues in families with adolescent adoptees

    Coping with infertility after adoption

    Multi-cultural families

    Recognition and effects of sexual abuse in children

    Issues in blending a family with adopted children and children
    	by birth

    Becoming Foster Parents

    Adopting sibling groups

    A dialogue with Birth Parents

    Adopting the older child

    The meaning of the search

    Adoption laws in Mass. (and another for Conn.)

    Unmarried couples

    Single parent adoption

    When is enough enough (regarding infertility)

    Waiting for the arrival of an adopted child

    Identified Adoption

    An infertile couple looks at adoption (panel discussion)

    Compassionate Adoption

    Open adoption

    Legal Risk adoption

The following article was posted to the usenet newsgroup ca.general
(which is normally a forum for discussion on issues of general interest
in California) a few weeks ago.  It presents another of those perspectives
of the "triad" described in the basenote.

Note on format:  the original letter from prospective adoptive parents was
posted by a recipient of the letter (Ric G).  He prepended a cover letter.
Due to my paranoia about reposting this article in a Digital Internal Use
Only notes conference, all contact information has been removed from this
public posting.  It is presented here solely as another reference point
for our discussion.

DougO

Article 202 of ca.general:
>From: ric@... (Ric G)
Date: 23 Mar 89 20:39:17 GMT
Distribution: ca


When I got home yesterday, my wife showed me a letter we had received from
a married couple we are both quite fond of.

The letter said they were in the process of looking for a child to adopt
through open, independent adoption.  It said the method of adoption was 
important to them because the adoptive parents and birth parent(s) meet
each other and make a mutual decision for the welfare of the child, without
any conventional agency or secrecy.

It pointed out that "open adoption" is completely legal in California (it
apparently is not in some states, which is why I have attempted to restrict
delivery of this news item to "ca") and IS NOT black market adoption.  

Adoption workers do not take possession or custody of the child: instead,
the child is taken directly from the place of birth by the adopting parents.
Both sets of parents are encouraged to participate in the adoption process.
The biological parents select freely and openly who will adopt their child 
from among the interested couples.  Confidentiality is respected as the
parties desire.

The Independent Adoption Center (phone: 800-877-OPEN or 415-944-4744, 
collect) provides counseling services to both sets of parents.  The
adopting parents may be asked to pay for certain medical expenses which
are directly related to the birthmother's pregnancy, such as medical,
legal, counseling, and special foods.  The only money exchanged in the
adoption process involves the above-mentioned costs of the birthmother
and legal and counseling services.  No one is paid for actually obtaining
the child.

The letter concluded by saying:

"We would be grateful if you would pass on the enclosed letter and brochure
(on the Independent Adoption Center) to anyone you know who may be pregnant
and possibly considering having her child adopted, or to anyone who might 
know someone in that position."

In response I called Robert and Janet and asked them if they wanted me to
use the net.  They thought it was a wonderful idea.  So, I'm reproducing
the letter which was enclosed, on the chance that somewhere out there one
of you knows a woman who is pregnant, and has chosen not to have an abortion
and also has chosen not to keep the child.  This system may just work for
someone out there.  

Two other things--PLEASE, PLEASE, NO FLAMES. . .it is not my intention to 
start an intellectual war on the merits and morals of this system.  I only
hope to help two people who deserve the chance to share themselves with
a child, and perhaps the chance to help some unborn child out there.

And, please respond directly to Janet and Robert.  Their telephone number
is in the letter which follows:

QUOTE:

Hello,

We are eager to hear the beautiful sound of a baby's laughter in our home.
We want our happiness to blossom into a family.  We look forward to the first
time our baby stretches out his arms to return Mom's hugs, wet kisses, the
joy of discovering each new taste and sound, squeals of delight in playing
with out gentle black cat with wonderful white whiskers, garbled hellos to
Dad over the phone, and slowing down the pace of our own lives to enjoy the
simple pleasures of following a child's explorations.

As teachers we have both dedicated many years of our lives to young people.
We know the joy of helping a child find his own way through a difficult
situation and sharing the wonder of learning about the world.  Teaching
other people's children, however, reminds us that we have not been able to
have a child ourselves.  We want to share the love, warmth, and caring
of our marriage with a little one.

We live in a lush and peaceful neighborhood in the hills of Berkeley, just
across the Bay from San Francisco with a view of the Golden Gate Bridge.
We live in a comfortable, sunny house surrounded by redwoods and greenery
where deer often come to browse.  Our home is half a block from the Rose
Garden, tennis courts, and a large wooded park where children of all ages
play with each other on slides, swings, and teeter-totters.  Nearby Tilden
Regional Park offers a lake, hiking, miniature train rides, and a carousel.
In additional to excellent schools, the Bay Area enjoys exceptional cultural
and recreational activities.

Together we would delight in sharing our active lifestyle with our child:
bicycling, hiking, camping, tennis, reading, and music.  Janet is as eager
to teach our child to love the water on her daily swim at Strawberry Canyon
as Robert is to have a little companion to teach how to ski at Tahoe.  Janet
looks forward to taking a break from teaching to stay home with our baby.
Robert will finish law school in May and has accepted an offer to work for
a large international law firm in San Francisco.

Our baby will be loved by great-grandparents, grandparents, numerous aunts
and uncles, and a growing tribe of cousins concentrated near us and in
Oregon.  Both of us have lived and studied abroad extensively, and we can
hardly wait to travel with our child and show him something of the world.

We are eager to offer your baby a loving home and the opportunity to grow
and realize his or her full potential.  If you are considering adoption 
and our home sounds like one you would want for your baby, please call us
collect at [...removed].
				Sincerely,

				Janet ... & Robert ...

UNQUOTE

 Since I did not want to corrupt the FWO: abortion string, I decided to put 
this here.

 This is a true story about private adoption.

 The mother got pregnant by her boyfriend on purpose. She thought he would have
to marry her. Having ideas of his own, he split. Being too late to legally get
an abortion (she waited a loooong time to tell him) she decided to go the
adoption route. She wanted to go private because she felt she could get more
for her baby this way. 

 The adopting couple were unable to have a child of their own. The husband had
children from his previous marriage, but together they were unable to conceive.
They decided to obtain a child through adoption. They are not poor in any
sense of the word.

 The terms of the adoption were astounding. The mother's entire set of medical
bills would need to be paid (~$5,000). The mother would be moving to California;
all related expenses would be paid. The couple would pay for her apartment
in California for 1 year. The couple would pay for an entire new wardrobe for 
the woman under the auspices that she would need it to find work. They would 
also give her several thousand in cash. All of this was with the stipulation 
that the woman not try to come back and see the child or anything like that.
The move to Cal was supposed to be permanent.

 The couple does all of these things. The mother moves to Cal, and gets an
expensive apartment (paid for a year). She gets a new wardrobe (several thousand
dollars worth). She does not get a job, but lives off the money they gave her in 
cash. When her year of living free is over, she returns to NH and demands to
see her child. The couple refuses. She threatens with court action, and wants to
at least see pictures of the child and the child's home. Fearing kidnapping,
the couple give pictures of another child (now older) and no pictures of the
house.

 That's where it stands now. After all of the money this woman got for her baby,
she is still not satisfied. In my opinion, the terms of this adoption were
tantamount to baby-selling, except they are legal because lawyers signed the
paperwork. I really think something needs to be done about this kind of legal
baby-selling. I do not think that it should be profitable for a woman to have
a child to sell. I have no problem at all in seeing that a woman's medical
bills be paid (relating to the child and post-pregnancy checkups). I do not
think that anyone should get paid thousands of dollars for a child.

 The Doctah

Re: .100

I have been thinking about this entry since I first read it a few 
weeks ago.  To be sure, I have had a myriad of feelings about it.  

I think that it would be helpful to understand where I stand politically 
regarding adoption.  First, adoption should not be viewed as a means to 
provide infertile couples with children.  Adoption should be viewed as a 
means of providing homes for homeless children.  I do not believe that 
being a parent is an inalienable right for anyone.

Second, whenever we have a situation where a woman is pregnant, doing what 
is in the *best interest of the mother* will be in the best interest of her 
child.  This applies to woman who are married or unmarried.  So often we 
talk about doing things that are in the best interest of the child, but we 
really aren't acting that way.  We are acting in the best interest of the 
doctors, or lawyers, or social workers, or adoptive parents.  We aren't 
even coming close to acting in the best interest of the child.  And as for 
the mother, well, she deserves to be punished anyway so we certainly won't 
worry about her!

When I read a letter from a couple, like the letter in note .100, the first 
question that comes to my mind is, "If they are *so* eager and long *so* 
much to be parents, why aren't they willing to adopt a child, a homeless 
child who is already on this earth, sitting perhaps, in an institution?"
There is a premise that adoptive parents must be guaranteed perfect, or 
non-defective children.  Well, a child who is not an infant, but still not 
with a family, might not be defective, but there is a potential for issues 
around bonding, behavior problems, etc.  However, there is no guarantee 
that an infant, placed with the adoptive family from birth, will bond with 
the family or not have behavior problems.

And when I read this letter, and others that I have seen of its ilk, I hope 
and pray that these slick marketing letters have been written because the 
adoption agency told the potential adoptive parents to pitch the sale in 
such manner.  If they are being chosen by the mother to be the parents of 
her child, what kinds of things would appeal to a young woman who is 16, 
17, 20, etc. and considering surrendering her child?  Well, I suppose that 
money/affluence, education, good jobs, nice home, vacations, etc. would 
appeal to the young woman considering adoption.  I just hope that the 
potential parents don't truly believe this stuff.

I look at the expectations that are built within a letter such as 
this..."we look forward to an active life with our child...hiking, biking, 
skiing, camping, etc. and we want our child to have education, etc."  Well, 
what happens when Suzie or Johnnie doesn't give a shit about all the 
activities that her/his parents are so turned on about?  And what happens 
when this little outsider isn't automatically accepted by the extended 
family? (And don't fool yourselves for a moment, because this kind of stuff 
does happen.)  What happens when two highly-educated parents end up with a 
child who has a learning disability (one that isn't detectable in infancy)? 
What happens if the child has behavior problems?  What happens when money 
and education and power and affluence can't overcome the genetic make-up of 
this child?  Do they give it back?  Adoptive parents *always* have the 
option to return the child at *any* time.

And what happens in the case of open adoption, where when Suzie or Johnnie 
is growing older...and maybe the adoptive parents are starting to feel a 
little threatened or vulnerable about continuing contact with the child's 
mother?  If, in an open adoption, the good will of the adoptive parents 
toward the mother ceases, she has no legal recourse because in the 
strictest legal sense, she has terminated *all* parental rights in the 
process of surrendering her child.  Closed adoption is never in the best 
interest of the mother, which automatically means it is not in the best 
interest of the child, and we still have a long way to go with open 
adoption before it will be handled in a manner that is in the best interest 
of the mother.

Laura
                                                                 

re: .101

I think that note .101 points out just one of the many problems with 
private adoptions.  There are others, as well, stories that don't make the 
birth mother look like some sort of criminal.

I would bet that there was no one representing the best interests of the 
mother when all these deals were cut.  And yes, this is a form of 
baby-selling, but so are surrogate agreements.  So are many of the 
adoptions that occur with children coming from third-world countries.  In a 
way, so are all the heroic measures that are used by the medical men in 
their laboratories when we venture into the world of mixing eggs and sperm 
in a glass dish.  At $5,000 a procedure, and most couples are willing to 
endure this process 3 - 5 times for a 'success' rate of around 11%, that 
makes the cost of a baby by in-vitro about $15,000- $25,000 or more.  
People often spend upwards of $40,000 to get pregnant at the hands of the 
medical maniacs.  And about 90% of these people that go this route never 
end up with a pregnancy or a baby.

"After all of the money this woman got for her baby, she is still not 
satisfied."  And why should she be? 

"I do not think that is should be profitable for a woman to have a child to 
sell."  Why shouldn't it be profitable for her?  It is for the in-vitro 
doctors...it is for the lawyers who arrange these cozy private adoptions.  
And, are you objecting to the woman receiving money or are you objecting to 
baby-selling in general?  If it is the latter, then you better broaden your 
scope of objections.  No matter how it looks on paper, in the lawyer's 
briefs or in the medical men's records, it is always the women who get 
exploited in the process and the process is never in the best interest of 
the child.

Laura
                                    

    Laura,
    
    How is conceiving a child by invitro fertilization 'never in the
    best intrests of the child'?
    
    Bonnie

    Any time I see a bunch of medical men getting *very* rich by preying on
    women who are desperate to conceive their own child, I automatically
    assume that what is happening is not in the best interest of the woman
    and therefore is not in the best interest of her child.
    
    Often, with invitro procedures, there is a mixing of egg and sperm that
    are not necessarily contributed by both parents.  This can set up a
    situation of lies and secrets where the parents may never tell their
    child of the biological connects that s/he may have to someone else. 
    In the case where a woman does become pregnant via invitro, even if her
    own egg or her husband's sperm is not used, there is very little chance
    that the child will ever know the truth.  I do not consider this to be
    in the best interest of the child.
    
    Laura
    

re: Laura

>I do not believe that 
>being a parent is an inalienable right for anyone.
 
 Then is the converse also true? Do you believe that not being a parent is
an inalienable right or not?

>Second, whenever we have a situation where a woman is pregnant, doing what 
>is in the *best interest of the mother* will be in the best interest of her 
>child.

 Not necessarily. Who defines best interest? The mother? Her doctor? Her
rabbi or priest? Her family? The father? Who?

 If she is not fully in charge of her faculties, she may not be sure what her
best interest is. Then who decides?

>Adoptive parents *always* have the 
>option to return the child at *any* time.

 I do not believe that this is true. Anyone know for sure? (or at least a 2nd
opinion)

>Closed adoption is never in the best 
>interest of the mother, which automatically means it is not in the best 
>interest of the child,

 This is only if you believe that the best interest of the mother automatically
implies the best interest of the child (which you obviously do). I can tell
you from experience that this is not so, especially if the mother is the judge
of "her best interest." My wife runs a motel in a town where she is the only
place that allows welfare cases and city assisted cases in. There is no 
question in my mind at all that these women (who ostensibly are looking out
for their own best interests) do not have their children's  best interest in
mind. (Not all of them, but enough to refute your statement that the mother's
best interest and the child's best interest always correlate exactly).

 This is obviously a tough and emotional issue. I feel that you are very eager
to use the terms "always" and "never" in situations where they do not apply.

re .103

>I would bet that there was no one representing the best interests of the 
>mother when all these deals were cut. 

 Well, actually, there was and is legal representation for the mother (if that's
what you mean by serving her best interest).

>"After all of the money this woman got for her baby, she is still not 
>satisfied."  And why should she be? 

 Should she not be happy that her unwanted child is far better cared for than
she ever could have managed? Should she not be happy that her child is normal
and well adjusted and loved? Should she not be happy that her son's new mother
is not a drug addict, unlike the old one? Should she not be happy that she was
given every conceivable advantage to get on with her life, nay, to improve her
life? Should she not be happy that her 9 months of pregnancy lined her pockets
better than over three years of her working?

>And, are you objecting to the woman receiving money or are you objecting to 
>baby-selling in general?

 Baby selling in general.

>No matter how it looks on paper, in the lawyer's 
>briefs or in the medical men's records, it is always the women who get 
>exploited in the process and the process is never in the best interest of 
>the child.

 It is a trivial exercise to prove this statement false. Again, I find your use
of always and never to be to your detriment, and to the detriment of your
arguments.

 The doctah

Re: 102

I was disturbed by the note in 102. I will try and express my thoughts on
this very emotional issue. 

I agree that the purpose of adoption is to give homeless children homes. But
the tone of the note was very harsh towards adoptive parents and also
infertile couples.

Maybe having a child is not a right, but that doesn't change the fact that 
dealing with infertility can be extremely painful and emotionally 
devestating to the couple involved. Some people really want to have thier
own child, made of thier genes, passing on thier history etc. It is a
real shame that these people who want children can not have them, and it
is also a shame that there are so many children who are born who are not
wanted. A couple (or single person for that matter) adopting a child is
a loving act. A woman giving her child up for adoption is also a loving
act.

Sure there are cases where you have unloving adoptive parents, but you also
have many cases of unloving biological parents.

I think the choice to give a child up for adoption is a personal one, and
not one where we can make general sweeping statements or judgements.

I also think the decisions an infertile couple makes are deeply personal
and others should not make general sweeping statements or judgements. My
disturbance with note 102 was the judmental nature of what infertile
couples should do. Every one has to make the personal and moral decisions
about what is right for them. If they want to spend the money and
emotional energy to go through in-vitro then that is thier choice. By
the way often in-vitro is the couples sperm and egg that is used, and
so they are the biological parents. Being biological parents is 
important to some people. And that type of decision by someone else is
none of our business.

I have a lot of empathy with couples who are unable to have children. I
have a lot of respect for the adoptive parents I know.

Muggsie

                                                                 

This is Laura replying from Holly's account...
    
    re: .106
    

>> Then is the converse also true? Do you believe that not being a parent is
>> an inalienable right or not?
   
    No. 
    
>Second, whenever we have a situation where a woman is pregnant, doing what 
>is in the *best interest of the mother* will be in the best interest of her 
>child.

    
>> If she is not fully in charge of her faculties, she may not be sure what her
>> best interest is. Then who decides?
   
    If we lived in a society where women and children weren't categorically
    exploited, if all women (regardless of race, national origin, color,
    financial circumstances and physical/mental health status) were
    treated with dignity and compassion, then I think it would be
    reasonably safe that those involved in making such determinations
    would, in fact, act in the best interest of the woman.  Acting in
    the best interest of the mother does not necessarily mean that she
    automatically keeps her child, but the *process* would hold integrity
    and dignity, none of which it has in current day standards.
    
>Adoptive parents *always* have the 
>option to return the child at *any* time.

>> I do not believe that this is true. Anyone know for sure? (or at least a 2nd
>> opinion)
   
    Well, being in denial isn't going to change the truth of this
    statement.  If you are interested in a second opinion, read "Shedding
    a Light on the Darker Side of Adoption" (don't remember the author's
    name at this time, but can provide in another note).
    
    The similarity between biological and adoptive families is that
    both can encounter child-rearing problems that require outside
    intervention.  The difference between biological and adoptive families
    is that when biological children need, perhaps, foster care during
    periods of the child's life, termination of parental rights of the
    biological parents is not automatically assumed, whereas, in the
    case of an adoptive child requiring this level of intervention,
    termination of the adoptive parents rights is almost always requested
    and usually expected or anticipated by social workers.  
     
>Closed adoption is never in the best 
>interest of the mother, which automatically means it is not in the best 
>interest of the child,

>>This is only if you believe that the best interest of the mother automatically
>>implies the best interest of the child (which you obviously do). I can tell
>>you from experience that this is not so, especially if the mother is the judge
>>of "her best interest." My wife runs a motel in a town where she is the only
>>that allows welfare cases and city assisted cases in.
    
    If this society was as invested in taking care of women and children
    that already exist as they are in creating high-tech babies, we
    wouldn't have homeless mothers and children in the proportions that
    we do.
    
>>   There is no 
>>question in my mind at all that these women (who ostensibly are looking out
>>for their own best interests) do not have their children's  best interest in
>>mind.
    
    And you don't seem to have any compassion for these women either.
     
    
>> This is obviously a tough and emotional issue. 
    
    Only to people who have something other than ice-water running through
    their veins.
    
     

>> Well, actually, there was and is legal representation for the mother (if that's
>> what you mean by serving her best interest).
   
    No, I don't think attorneys are educated or equiped to serve the
    best interests of the mother in this situation.  
    
    
>> Should she not be happy that her unwanted child is far better cared for than
>> she ever could have managed?  
   
    It seems that there is a very big assumption here that the child
    is unwanted.  Maybe she could not manage, but that does not
    automatically equate to unwanted.  However, that is one of the
    double-binds that birth mothers are put into.  They are either unable
    to manage, or convinced that they are unable to manage, and then
    when they surrender the child, they are admonished for not having
    wanted that child.
     
>> Should she not be happy that her child is normal
>> and well adjusted and loved? 
    
    More assumptions.  There is a high occurence of abuse among adopted
    children.
    
>>  Should she not be happy that her son's new mother
>>  is not a drug addict, unlike the old one?
    
    So, the birth mother is an addict?  This part of the story was left
    out of your first representation...and given your response here
    it sounds like it was left out in order to create an argument or
    a one-up contest.  However, people who are drug addicted do not
    automatically qualify as the scum of the earth, nor are they any
    less deserving of compassion.
    
>>  Should she not be happy that she was
>>  given every conceivable advantage to get on with her life, nay, to 
>>  improve her life?
    
    Throwing money at an active addict is not the proper course of
    treatment if the concern was for her life to improve.  
     
    
    
>No matter how it looks on paper, in the lawyer's 
>briefs or in the medical men's records, it is always the women who get 
>exploited in the process and the process is never in the best interest of 
>the child.                       ^^^^^^^

>> It is a trivial exercise to prove this statement false. Again, I find
>> your use of always and never to be to your detriment, and to the 
>> detriment of your arguments.                               
    
    When talking about the *process* of adoption, surrogacy, invitro, etc., 
    the *process* is never in the best interest of the child, although the 
    outcome may inadvertently benefit the child. 
                    
    And I find your lack of compassion a detriment to yourself and this
    community.
    
    
    Laura
    

    Re .108
    
    Are you sure that a finalized adoption is any different than biological
    parenthood under the law?  My understanding is that once the adoption
    has gone through, social workers are out of the picture.
    
    However, any parent can put their child up for adoption at any time,
    and it wouldn't surprise me that it would happen more with children
    who were adopted.  And, as we all know, imperfect and older children
    are usually unadoptable, and end up in institutions and bounced
    from foster home to foster home.
    
    Foster parents are expected to give the child up if it becomes a
    burden.  A major drawback in the foster care system.
    
    I think there is some confusion about how "final" adoptions are.
    Could someone who has experienced adopting children (Bonnie?) shed
    some light on this?
    
    Elizabeth

    
<    However, any parent can put their child up for adoption at any time,
<    and it wouldn't surprise me that it would happen more with children
<    who were adopted.

Why wouldn't it surprise you? It would surprise me. Why is there an
assumption that adoptive parents love or want thier children any less,
or that they want "perfect" children more?

Muggsie

    

    re: .110
    
    In terms of dealing with problem children who happen to adopted,
    parents have to overcome the basic fact that these children are very
    different from them, don't carry any of the parents' genes, and often
    don't look like the parents.  Therefore, when difficulties arise and
    there are no biological ties (and the child may look and even feel like
    a stranger to the parents) if may feel like an impossible feat to the
    parents to try to work through the problems.
    
    No matter how much we, as a society, gloss over the issues, adopted
    families are different from biologically created families.  We are only
    continuing a long-standing disservice to adoptees by perpetuating the
    denial of difference.  It is this kind of denial that silences adoptees
    and creates guilt feelings in the adoptees who decide that speaking up
    is better than silence.
    
    As a follow-up to a previous note, "Shedding light on The Dark side of
    Adoption" is written by Marsha Riben, 1988 and published by Harlo
    Press, 50 Victor, Detroit, MI 48203.
    
    Laura
    

    We finalized the adoption of our second child, Molly, this
    morning.  It was a wonderful experience.  Perhaps somewhat like
    marriage, it's by far the happiest thing that local judges get to do,
    and the whole court staff comes in and celebrates with you.

    As to how final it is?  Does anyone know of an adopted child
    later put up for adoption?  I've never heard of it....and have
    contact with many adoptive families.  I can assure you that
    you have to work quite hard to adopt a child.  In that sense, its
    very different than getting married.  You have to spend many sessions
    with social workers and often therapists whose job it is to make
    sure you are really ready, that you understand what's involved, that
    you REALLY want to be a parent, etc. etc. etc.  I would expect that
    the 'rate' of putting adopted kids up for adoption would be far lower
    than for biological kids.  Given no data, all we can do is express
    our gut feel.

    Laura, you sound like you're in a lot of pain.  I hope this community
    provides some comfort.  But, I strongly disagree with your highly
    critical view of adoption as a process and of all those of us who
    are part of that process.  I applaud your sharing your view based
    on your experience.  For many, its a positive experience for
    all parties involved.  I'm sure there are abuses in every system
    including adoption.  I do not think they are inherent.  Its too
    easy to attack people who are already in pain, who are already
    struggling, who are very vulnerable.  Please go a little easier on us.
    bob

Laura,

Thank you for starting this note. Unfortunately when I first started
reading WN I skipped by a lot of notes just trying to catch up. So I
did not start reading this note until a few reply's ago. Much of what
you said hit a nerve and really bugged me. I also realized that you
and I were coming from a different place and I didn't really know where
you were coming from. 

So I started reading this note from the beginning. I am only up to note .30
and have a ways to go. So far I have gained some insight and appreciate
all the reply's into this note.

Just to let everyone know where I am ... My husband and I are currently in
the process of dealing with infertility. We are not very far along yet and
have some information but not enough. Dealing with infertility is painful
and has a whole set of issues - which is one of the nerves you hit.
The whole process has starting me thinking about what is important to me. 
It is important to me to have a family and that includes children. It is
not that important to me to be pregnant, and I won't be devastated if I
don't have that experience. 

We are looking further into the fertility issues but are also recognizing
our limits. We are not willing to be one of those couples who go for 
years and years trying to have biological children, through all kinds of 
lengths, money and pain. 

I am starting to think about adoption and the associated issues. I have
begun to think that even if we do get pregnant, that we may still want
to adopt other harder to adopt children.

We don't know what the answers are yet. I will keep reading and catch up on
the rest of this note before I reply any more.

Muggsie

I have never adopted, or even applied for adoption, and I usually do my
very best to stay out of the extremely controversial topics that come
up in this conference.  But this is one time I just had to put my two
cents' worth in. 

RE: .102

>> "If they are *so* eager and long *so* much to be parents, why aren't they
>> willing to adopt a child, a homeless child who is already on this earth,
>> sitting perhaps, in an institution?" There is a premise that adoptive
>> parents must be guaranteed perfect, or non-defective children.  Well, a
>> child who is not an infant, but still not with a family, might not be
>> defective, but there is a potential for issues around bonding, behavior
>> problems, etc.  However, there is no guarantee that an infant, placed with
>> the adoptive family from birth, will bond with the family or not have
>> behavior problems.

I believe that often the feeling is that if the child is going to have 
problems, the couple at least wants the problems to be *theirs*, not 
problems inflicted by someone else.  I'm not defending that attitude, but I 
believe it's often the rationale behind couples who don't consider 
handicapped or abused children.  I have more admiration than I can possibly
express for couples who *do* open their homes to such children, but I also
recognize that such an option isn't right for everyone. 

>> I look at the expectations that are built within a letter such as
>> this..."we look forward to an active life with our child...hiking, biking,
>> skiing, camping, etc. and we want our child to have education, etc." 

Laura, I don't have any children, adopted or biological.  But if I did get
a child by *either* means, those expectations aren't too different from
what I'd express.  I would certainly hope that when the time came I'd be
able to roll with the punches if my child didn't like any of those things,
but I can't imagine a prospective parent *not* having hopes and dreams of
what he or she would want for his/her child. 

>> Adoptive parents *always* have the option to return the child at *any*
>> time. 

This may be regulated state by state, I don't know.  But I do know for a 
fact it isn't true in Texas.  Once the adoption is finalized, there is no 
legal difference between an adopted child and a biological one.  None.  
Either may be put up for adoption, but "returning" an adopted child to the 
institution from whence he/she came simply isn't an option.

>> Closed adoption is never in the best interest of the mother, which
>> automatically means it is not in the best interest of the child, 

Are you saying that *all* the millions of children who were adopted by
closed adoption over the years would have been better off (a) with their
biological mothers who either didn't want them or couldn't take care of
them, or (b) in orphanages?  Each and every one of them?  Since you are so
free with the use of the word "never," I must assume that's what you mean. 

RE: .103

>> People often spend upwards of $40,000 to get pregnant at the hands of the
>> medical maniacs.  And about 90% of these people that go this route never
>> end up with a pregnancy or a baby.

I won't voice my opinion of your generalization about infertility doctors
being medical maniacs; I think such a comment speaks for itself.  But can
you substantiate your statement that 90% of infertility patients never end
up with a pregnancy or a baby?  I don't have any statistics on that, and 
apparently you do.

>> No matter how it looks on paper, in the lawyer's briefs or in the medical
>> men's records, it is always the women who get exploited in the process and
>> the process is never in the best interest of the child. 

Again, I have to ask what you *would* consider in the best interests of the 
child?  What *realistic* alternative would you favor?

							Pat
    

>    If this society was as invested in taking care of women and children
>    that already exist as they are in creating high-tech babies, we
>    wouldn't have homeless mothers and children in the proportions that
>    we do.
 
 Perhaps. However, it does not answer the question. (or more accurately, rebut 
my contradiction of your previous statement)

>>   There is no 
>>question in my mind at all that these women (who ostensibly are looking out
>>for their own best interests) do not have their children's  best interest in
>>mind.
    
>    And you don't seem to have any compassion for these women either.
 
 False, but nonetheless it is not the issue. The issue is that I disproved your
assertion that "what's best for the mother is automatically best for the child."
FWIW- I have more compassion than you'll ever know, especially from reading
notes.

>> This is obviously a tough and emotional issue. 
    
>    Only to people who have something other than ice-water running through
>    their veins.

 I guess that even quoting this would qualify as nit picking.

>    No, I don't think attorneys are educated or equiped to serve the
>    best interests of the mother in this situation.  

 Who then?

>    It seems that there is a very big assumption here that the child
>    is unwanted.  Maybe she could not manage, but that does not
>    automatically equate to unwanted.  However, that is one of the
>    double-binds that birth mothers are put into.  They are either unable
>    to manage, or convinced that they are unable to manage, and then
>    when they surrender the child, they are admonished for not having
>    wanted that child.

 Ok. Perhaps 'unwanted' is not always accurate. I wonder how many adopted 
children were indeed unwanted, and how many had mothers that could not have
cared for them. Guilty as charged. I shouldn't have said unwanted as being
a necessary condition to being adopted.

>    So, the birth mother is an addict?  This part of the story was left
>    out of your first representation...and given your response here
>    it sounds like it was left out in order to create an argument or
>    a one-up contest.  However, people who are drug addicted do not
>    automatically qualify as the scum of the earth, nor are they any
>    less deserving of compassion.

 No it wasn't left out intentionally. I didn't say she was scum of the earth or
undeserving of compassion. What was implied was that she was unable to properly
care for her child since her control of her own life was impinged by her
addiction. Thus, she was not in a position to make decisions as to what was
best for her child, since her faculties were so often impaired. BTW- the 
adoptive parents did not learn of her cocaine addiction until after the baby
was adopted.

>    Throwing money at an active addict is not the proper course of
>    treatment if the concern was for her life to improve.  
 
 First point- it was not known that she was an addict until after the adoption.
Second- she was given every conceivable advantage to succeed. She still failed.
She does deserve compassion, but it is up to her to put her life back together.

>    When talking about the *process* of adoption, surrogacy, invitro, etc., 
>    the *process* is never in the best interest of the child, although the 
>    outcome may inadvertently benefit the child. 

 I find that difficult to swallow. How is the process of having a child taken 
from a parent that is unable to provide for the child's welfare and given to a
person who can not in the best interest of the child? You've lost me.

>    And I find your lack of compassion a detriment to yourself and this
>    community.

 Perhaps you are not looking very hard. I suffer from no actual lack of 
compassion. I'm certain that you can find other noters that can attest that I
do have compassion. My compassion is not limitless (as you may have guessed.)
I believe most strongly in personal responsibility, which makes me somewhat
less compassionate than my distributed responsibility brethren.

 The Doctah

re: .112

There is a vast difference between licensed agency sponsored adoptions and 
adoptions that are handled 'privately' by lawyers who basically have no 
training in such matters.  

Potential parents that adopt through a licensed adoption agency are 
evaluated and assessed as potential parents.  The fact remains that this 
process is not fool-proof and adopted children can and do end up in abusive 
homes.  Private adoptions would only serve to increase the potential for 
placing children in abusive situations because there is no screening of 
potential parents.  We, as a society, should do everything in our power to 
ensure that the fate of Lisa Steinberg never become the fate of any other 
child who is relinquished for adoption.  Joel illegally kept those two 
children, the adoptions were never finalized, pointing out only a few of 
the potential areas for abuse within private adoptions.

Given the potentials for abuse in privately arranged adoptions, I would 
hope that women who are considering surrender of a child would only 
consider using a licensed agency for the adoption.

As for the finality of the adoption, an adoption can be annulled if health
problems are detected after the adoption is finalized:

"In most states, the law provides that where an adopted child shows 
evidence of a mental deficiency or mental illness, resulting from a 
condition that existed before the child's adoption, the adoptive parents may 
ask the court to annul or set aside the adoption." Marsha Riben, 1988.

Lois Gilman, author of The Adoption Resource Book, writes that, "We have no 
idea of the total number of adoption in the United States."  Marsha Riben 
follows up this fact by pointing out that, "As if obtaining clear numbers 
of adoption placements weren't difficult enough, imagine the difficulties 
faced in trying to estimate the number of adoption disruptions.  Agencies 
report a 15% termination, or failure rate; one can only speculate what the 
figures would be if it included non-agency or private placements as well."

Marsha Riben then goes on to present some myths and facts regarding 
adoption:

"MYTH: Adoption provides children with two parents who will love them.

FACT: Many birthmothers love and want their children and only surrender 
because they are told it is the loving thing to do or because they fail to 
receive the help they need.

FACT: Although only two percent of the population is adopted, approximately 
twenty-five percent of those adolescents known to mental health facilities 
are adopted.  Most were adopted as infants.  This is because adoptees often 
experience the surrender by their original mother as a rejection.  this 
feeling of rejection often cannot be alleviated by even the most loving 
parents.

FACT: Adoptions fail at a rate of at least fifteen percent.

FACT: Childless couples suffer pressure to conform to society's model of 
the ideal, nuclear family.

FACT: Adoptive parents are often ill-prepared for their children's natural 
curiosity regarding their heritage, and most operate in a void where their 
children's medical history is concerned.

MYTH: Adoption is best for the single mother who will forget and go on with 
her life.

FACT: Birthparents have been shown to experience lieflong grief as a result 
of the loss of their children."

I think that there is a misconception that because I am militant regarding 
adoption reform this somehow automatically equates to the fact that I 
haven't had a positive adoption experience.  Nor am I saying that abuse is 
inherent in adoption.  Some of the ways in which we conduct adoptions are 
fraught with potential abuse.  Others, by virtue of the methods, reduce the 
potential for abuse.

A positve or negative adoption experience is a relative issue.  There is a 
lot of grey area in terms of looking at the positive and negatives in 
adoption.
 
Would it have been easier for me to grow up in biological family with a 
mother who was an active alcoholic and who would have died at a critical 
point in my life (I was 16 years old the year my birth mother died)?

Was it easier for me to grow up in a family that provided me with economic, 
social and educational advantages that I probably wouldn't have had if I 
stayed with my birth family?

The answer to both questions is yes and no.  

I don't necessarily have pain regarding the issues of adoption, 
certainly some frustration in how we handle it, and certainly some ideas 
regarding how it needs to change.  

I think that people such as our new president, George Bush, and anti-abortion 
activists who blithely propose adoption as the 'perfect' and 'simple' 
solution to unplanned/unwanted pregnancy is a gross insult and a slap in 
the face to all people who are involved in the adoption triad (the triad 
consisting of birth parents, adoptees and adoptive parents).  Adoption is 
an alternative but it is not *the* perfect or simple solution.  

I think that adoption is necessary.  But I think that we need to do it 
differently, more humanely.  We must stop casting birth mothers in a 
double-jeopardy role as saints (because they've given some loving couple an 
opportunity to parent) and sinners (because they as women and mothers have 
abandoned their child).  

Adoptees must be given full citizenship rights as adults.  They must have 
access to their originial records on demand (keeping in mind that not all 
adoptees want access to their records).  We must be sensitive to the 
reality that adoptees have complicated 'family trees' and the old model of 
adoptee guilt for wanting access to their full heritage is not a model that 
fosters positive self-esteem in adoptees.

To be sure, dealing with infertility is a painful issue.  But, Bob, the reality
is that every person involved in the adoption triad is dealing with painful 
issues.  We are all vulnerable, we are all struggling.  We still need to 
find ways to do it differently, ways in which the rights and dignity of all 
involved are preserved.

Laura

re: .114

Pat,

Perhaps these comments will answer a few of your questions...

>> I look at the expectations that are built within a letter such as
>> this..."we look forward to an active life with our child...hiking, biking,
>> skiing, camping, etc. and we want our child to have education, etc." 

Laura, I don't have any children, adopted or biological.  But if I did get
a child by *either* means, those expectations aren't too different from
what I'd express.  I would certainly hope that when the time came I'd be
able to roll with the punches if my child didn't like any of those things,
but I can't imagine a prospective parent *not* having hopes and dreams of
what he or she would want for his/her child. 

**I'm not saying that parental expectations are necessarily different when 
dealing with biological vs. adopted children.  The difference is in the 
fact that parental expectations hold different meaning and inherent 
problems for adopted children.  In many cases, there are the obvious 
genetic difference that adoptees face, and some cope with this better than 
others.  Often, adoptees don't resemble *anyone* in their immediate family 
and on top of looking different, adoptees often have very different 
personalities than their adoptive parents or relatives within the extended 
family.  If you layer on top of that the adoptees guilt at perhaps having 
failed in fulfulling parental expectations in other areas...interest in 
sports, academics, art, music, whatever, the 'expectation' issue can be far 
more volatile for the adoptee than for the biologically related child.  
This is not to minimize conflicts and problems that can and do arise 
between parents and biological children regarding parental expectations.

>> Adoptive parents *always* have the option to return the child at *any*
>> time. 

This may be regulated state by state, I don't know.  But I do know for a 
fact it isn't true in Texas.  Once the adoption is finalized, there is no 
legal difference between an adopted child and a biological one.  None.  
Either may be put up for adoption, but "returning" an adopted child to the 
institution from whence he/she came simply isn't an option.

**I have gone back and checked some of my reference books, and it is true 
that adoption laws differ from state to state.


>> Closed adoption is never in the best interest of the mother, which
>> automatically means it is not in the best interest of the child, 

Are you saying that *all* the millions of children who were adopted by
closed adoption over the years would have been better off (a) with their
biological mothers who either didn't want them or couldn't take care of
them, or (b) in orphanages?  Each and every one of them?  Since you are so
free with the use of the word "never," I must assume that's what you mean. 

**No, I'm not saying that adoption in never in the best interest of the 
child.  The problem here seems to be a misunderstanding when I refer to 
*closed* adoptions as never in the best interest of the child.  A closed 
adoption means that the adoptees records are sealed forever, even when he 
or she reaches adulthood.  The rationale for closed adoption and sealed 
birth records changes depending on which member of the triad you represent. 
If you are a birth mother, closed adoption is touted as protecting the 
privacy of the birth mother.  This attitude dates back to the days of 
illegitimacy and extreme social ostracism that birth mothers faced if their 
'secret' got out.  Most birth mothers don't want to be 'protected' by these 
outdated laws and social norms.  Closed adoption is no longer necessary as 
an institution to protect birth mothers from 'the stigma' of prenancy out 
of wedlock.

If you are an adoptee, closed adoption is touted as a way of protecting the 
adoptee...but from whom?  It was once believed by social workers, adoption 
social workers, that adoptees who bonded properly with their families would 
never want or need to know about thier biological heritage.  Adoptees 
everywhere are saying, we want access to our records.  Adoptees are saying 
that there is no need for this 'protection' and who better should know 
their own needs than adoptees?

If you are an adoptive parent, closed adoption is touted as a way of 
protecting adoptive parents from birth mothers who, of course, are going to 
come back and try to steal these children away.  This notion is also 
categorically false.  Women who have made the decision to surrender simply 
want to know that their child is alive and well, that the adoption did go 
through, that the child did not end up in an institution.

But of primary concern to me are the rights of the adoptee.  Adoptee right 
are never served by closed adoption and sealed records.  Closed adoptions 
and sealed records perpetuate lies and secrecy in adoption and do not 
support adoptees in developing positive self-regard for themselves or their 
origins.  Usually we hide things that are deemed too terrible to talk 
about.  Is lying and secrecy better than the truth?  I think not.



>> People often spend upwards of $40,000 to get pregnant at the hands of the
>> medical maniacs.  And about 90% of these people that go this route never
>> end up with a pregnancy or a baby.

I won't voice my opinion of your generalization about infertility doctors
being medical maniacs; I think such a comment speaks for itself.  But can
you substantiate your statement that 90% of infertility patients never end
up with a pregnancy or a baby?  I don't have any statistics on that, and 
apparently you do.

**The Boston Globe magazine ran an article re: infertility treatment in 
last Sunday's globe..April 30.  I do not have the article anymore, the 
stats are taken from that article.  many doctors who are treating 
infertility boast results of 17% or higher.  This means that doctors *are* 
lying to these couples which does make me suspicious of the doctors' 
motives.  Infertility is an issue that is loaded with as much emotion as 
adoption is for the adoptee.  And knowing this (meaning the doctors 
treating infertility know this) means that there is a lot of unethical 
practice going on in the world of infertility treatment, which is why I 
refer to them as medical maniacs.  In fact, that was the most polite word I 
could come up with given the fact that they are sucking up thousands of 
dollars from people dealing with a very sensitve and painful issue, and 
taking advantage of this vulnerability to fatten their own bank accounts.

The only lower life form than these types of doctors that lie and paint 
false hopes for couples are attorneys that arrange surrogate contracts.

>> No matter how it looks on paper, in the lawyer's briefs or in the medical
>> men's records, it is always the women who get exploited in the process and
>> the process is never in the best interest of the child. 

Again, I have to ask what you *would* consider in the best interests of the 
child?  What *realistic* alternative would you favor?

					
    
**To start, I would consider open adoption in the best interest of the 
child.  I would consider open records for adoptees reaching adulthood in 
the best interest of the child-now-adult.  I would consider more humane 
ways of adoption in the best interest of all parties involved.  I would 
consider outlawing of surrogate contracts in the best interest of the 
child.  I would consider honesty and openness in adoption in the best 
interest of the child, especially if we are truly concerned with the child 
developing healthy self-esteem.  I would consider legislation mandating 
that all adoptions be handled by licensed agencies (vs. private adoption 
handled by lawyers) in the best interest of the child.  These are just some 
realistic measures that I would favor.

Laura

Well I have caught up on this note and it has been very enlightening and
thought provoking. As I said in an earlier note my husband and I are currently
thinking about adoption. We are not yet at a point to make a decision (or even
close) but we are talking about the issues and what we might want to do in
the future.

To be honest when we first started talking about it, I definetly thought I
would NOT want to meet the birth mother of a baby I was adopting. That feeling
came from a vague feeling of threat, both in terms of her coming back, and
somehow a need to not have her interfere in my life. I thought about this
totally in terms of myself and not at all from the persepective of the
child or the birth mother.

My feelings have changed on this partly in becoming aware of the issues of the
adoption triad brought up in this file. And also due to the experience of a
couple we know.

They just adopted a baby 3 weeks ago. It happened very quickly because the
birth mother had a list of requirements for the adoptive parents. They were
the one couple that met those requirements. (This is through an agency by
the way and not through private lawyers). One of the requirements was that
the birth mother meet the prospective parents. 

The birth mother has given the adoptive parents pictures of herself and family
to share with thier son, when he becomes interested. She also wrote him a
letter for them to give to him when he becomes old enough and wants to know
more. She has also signed the consent form to release her name if he wants to
search.

In talking with my friends it struck me how this situation benefits them all.
First if I put myself in the place of a birth mother I know I would have much
more peace of mind knowing what kind of people adopted my child. I would also
feel much better knowing he or she had a letter from me expressing my feelings
about giving him or her up. And that someday in the future if the child wants
to he or she could find me.

From the childs perspective the information is available readily and easily. 
There is no need for secrecy. All the feelings expressed in this file say it
better than I can. It seems that some of the issues mentioned would be 
eased by having pictures, a letter and the knowledge that searching is ok
with both the adoptive parents and the birth mother. (I don't know about
the birth father).

From the adoptive parents point of view I think it is also better. I think
the feeling of being threatened is more so by lack of knowledge. This way
they have met the birth mother and have some idea of what kind of person
she is and at least in this case I have the feeling (though not stated by
my friends) that this meeting in fact alleviated thier feelings of threat.
Plus they have information to give to thier child when he is ready. It
makes it much easier for them to be honest and open, because they do not
have to keep secrets either due to protecting someone or lack of knowledge.

So I have come to the realization that Laura is right open adoption is the
best possible way for all parties involved.

A word about infertility and doctors. First a lot depends on the doctors -
not all are maniacs. I think there is a tendancy for the medical profession to
look for answers, solutions and cures and not give up. At some point in the
infertility issue it is time to give up. Many doctors do not help couples come
to this point - or push for another procedure.

My feeling is that couples in this situation have to talk openly with each
other about what thier limits are and how long they are going to go through
this. I know this is what we are doing, and I at least can relax in knowing
how far we are willing to go and how long we will go through it. Many  couples
do not do this and so it is always one more thing.... until it is too late
to make other choices.

Before reading this file we had already come to the realization that we 
probably did not want to go through with procedures that involved someone
else's sperm or egg. I had my own reasons for this, but the ethical issues
and adoptive issues brought up in this file just confirm this  in my own mind.

On in-vitro - there have been several articals on what the success rate is.
The average I have heard is 10% a try, and $5000 a try. Personally we have
decided that at that low rate of success and cost it just isn't worth it.
Even with 4 trys and %20K the chance of success is less than 50%. But there
are couples who think it is worth it and that is there decision at least
where it is thier sperm and egg. 

I think the ethical and emotional issues brought up by using donated
sperm, eggs, and surragacy are real and ones that need to be dealt with.
The comments on the effects of these things on the children is something
we need to be real concerned about - and I am not aware of those discussions
taking place enough. I doubt the infertility doctors bring those issues up
at all with prospective patients.

Enough for now,

Muggsie

RE: .117

Laura, I agree with a lot of what you are saying, but I don't follow
your logic that lawyers are just out to get money and that adoption
agencies aren't.  Unless they're a non-profit agency, chances are they
are doing it for the money.  People even work for charities for the
money.  

What I do think is important is for families to go through the home study
through licensed approved social workers (which could be part of an
agency). After that point I don't see why the agency has to be involved
accept optionally as a "clearing house" (not to be impersonal, but to imply
a concept).  If adoptive parents and birth parents meet by some other
method, and do follow the legal procedure, why should an agency be
involved?  Adoptions are expensive and not everyone can afford to pay
agencies, so there should be more alternatives. I've heard that an average
domestic adoption in the U.S. costs around $20K!. 


Disclaimer: I know that adoptions of hard to place children are easier
and less costly.  These children are often minorities, handicapped, older,
or part of a sibling group.  It would be wonderful if all potential
adoptive parents chose these children.  Yet those parents need to be
realistic in their choice no matter how awful it sounds.  Not everyone
is able to be parents of (pick one).  If you've never been a parent, it
can be a scary thing to contemplate.  

Since adoption and infertility methods are so expensive, I would be apt
to think couples who do go through either process probably would make
better parents on the average considering the time, effort and money
they put forth.  They must have really considered if it was worth it.

...Karen

    re: .119

Karen,
    
>>Laura, I agree with a lot of what you are saying, but I don't follow
>>your logic that lawyers are just out to get money and that adoption
>>agencies aren't.  Unless they're a non-profit agency, chances are they
>>are doing it for the money.  People even work for charities for the
>>money.  
    
    I think that all adoption agencies are non-profit, but they do need to
    cover costs, like paying rent and paying salaries of social workers who
    do the family studies, support staff, etc.  And I don't think that
    people who work for non-profit agencies should work for free, but I
    also know that Noel Keene (the lawyer who arranges surrogate contracts)
    had an income of $600,000 during the year that the Baby M case hit the
    streets.  I don't know of any non-profit agency directors or social
    workers who make that kind of money in one year.
    
>>If adoptive parents and birth parents meet by some other
>>method, and do follow the legal procedure, why should an agency be
>>involved?
    
    Because private adoptions that are handled by doctors and lawyers do
    not fall under the same kind of jurisdiction that apply to licensed
    agencies.  So, in private adoption situations, there is a greater risk
    that the process could potentially not be handled in any sort of legal
    manner.  Also, since we still have to deal with closed records,
    agencies are required to keep their records forever.  Lawyers are only
    required to keep records for 3 years.  What happens to an adoptee or
    birthparent who tries, 20 or 30 years later to find out information
    pertaining to the adoption?  If it was handled by an attorney, the
    records may well have been destroyed after 3 years.
    
>>Adoptions are expensive and not everyone can afford to pay
>>agencies, so there should be more alternatives. I've heard that an average
>>domestic adoption in the U.S. costs around $20K!. 

    I think it would be reasonable for birthparents and adoptive parents to 
    arrange their own adoptions without incurring costs of lawyers and 
    agencies IF WE HAVE, ON THE BOOKS, LAWS ENSURING OPEN ADOPTION.  This 
    is an important clause because it protects, first the child being 
    adopted, and second, the rights of the birthparents.  In a case where
    a child is relinquished to adoption and the adoptive parent(s) turn 
    out to be abusive, the birthmother/birthparents should have the first 
    right in deciding if they are now in a position to care for and raise
    their child or whether she/he/they want to place their child in
    another adoptive home.

    With a closed adoption system, birthmothers/birthparents have no way
    of knowing when an adoption fails (for a variety of reasons) or when
    the child is removed from the adoptive home by a social service agency
    when abuse occurs.  Open adoptions would be beneficial to those people
    who are most at risk in the adoption triad...the infants being adopted.

    Laura

    
    
On January 21, 1989, a 19 year old single woman gave birth to her first 
child, a healthy daughter.  On January 25, 1989, she signed a consent to 
adoption, after Deaconness Maternity Home explained to her that she had 
thirty days in which to withdraw her consent. Before the thirty days were 
up, she realized the enormity of her mistake.  She and her parents, with 
whom she lives, sought the assistance of an attorney in order to recover 
her precious daughter.  They followed all of the necessary legal steps and 
happily prepared to bring the baby home.  Instead, the maternity home 
fought to keep the baby.

At a hearing the judge, an adoptive grandparent of two children obtained 
from the same agency, explained that since the mother was single the child 
would be better off adopted.  She refused to allow withdrawal of consent.  
Since the baby was in foster care, the judge specifically asked Deaconess 
Maternity Home whether the family originally "chosen" by the mother was 
still available.  She was told it was.  The baby's grandmother has learned 
that the baby was instead transferred to another agency for placement.  The 
family has appealed the case to the Oklahoma Supreme Court and expects to 
know more by May 17.

************************************************************************

This story is not about something that happened in 1959.  This is 1989.  
These kinds of false promises are made to unsuspecting single, pregnant 
women, and the promises are broken more often than kept.

This society continues to punish single women who give birth.

This is a speech that was given before the American Adoption Congress at 
its national conference in April, 1989 by CUB member Paula Auclair.


Why Birthparents Need Open Records: Open Records Can Close Wounds


A few weeks ago, a deranged drifter carried assault weapons onto an 
elementary schoolyard in Stockton, California and, without explanation, 
began mowing down kindergartners.  Five died, about thirty were wounded, 
before he shot himself.  Remember?  Disn't you cringe when you heard the 
news flash?  I always cringe -- I often choke up -- when I hear news 
flashes of gratuitous violence, especially when children are the victims.

I didn't have to panic, though, because this is 1989.  If it had been 1969, 
I would have panicked.  I would have dropped my cup and slumped to the 
floor in front of the sink and battled for the presence of mind to 
calculate the unthinkable, to figure out who could possibly help me violate 
sacrosanct records, before the little hell I was trapped in suffocated me.  
I would have had this excessive but spontaneous reaction because in 1969 
the daughter I had surrendered to adoption was five years old and would 
have been enrolled in some elementary school in Stockton, California.

Lucky for me, this wasn't my turn to panic, wasn't my suffocating little 
hell.  Maybe it was yours.  Maybe, even if you know where all your children 
are, even if there's not the slightest possibility that any of the dead 
kindergartners on the shrouded stretchers could be genetically connected to 
you, maybe you can understand the panic -- the inescapable, daily or weekly 
hell -- that countless news flashes provoke in us when we're alienated, at 
least alienated in law, from our birthrelatives.  They are cringe-making, 
if not panic-making, news flashes of
    toddlers falling into pools and drowning,
    plagues of teen suicides,
    school buses sliding down embankments on the was to Baptist bible camp,
    drunk drivers smashing into nine-year-olds on bicycles,
    basketball superstars overdosing on cocaine,
    lethal abuse of dark-eyed, dark-haired first graders and
    infanticide,
especially when the victims are identified as adopted or illegally adopted.

Closed records almost always mean birthparents don't know where our 
children are.  I was lucky, maybe, to know that my daughter was in 
Stockton.  But even when we don't know where they are, there are things we 
can't help knowing about the children we're disconnected from:
    age and sex, at least, unless amnesia intercedes to blunt the pain;
    if she's like her birthmother, she has dark hair and eyes;
    if he's like his birthfather, he's addicted to playing piano and
      basketball;
    if her adoptive parents have kept their promise, she's a devout Baptist.

About our children's adoptive parents, we're told almost nothing.  At 
least, nothing that isn't intimidating.  Never so much as they're told 
about us.  But we hear, almost universally, that:
    they are a loving, professional couple;
    they're older than we, and have tried for many years to have children;
    they're wealthier than we, surely able to buy bicycles and piano
      lessons; and
    they've been certified as ideal parents (unlike us), so they deserve
      to have children, to have someone else's children.

We hear things, things which, no matter how much we've been counseled to 
repress and deny, will, from time to time, connect the children in the news 
flashes from hell to the children we conceived and grew to love in the 
womb, gave birth to and were forced to surrender.

The closed adoption/closed records system most of us surrendered to 
constructs these suffocating prison hells around us and, I think, around 
adopteees who have been more or less lovingly spared the gory details of 
their origins, who may know only that their birthparents lived somewhere 
like Louisiana when the tidal waves kill hundreds on the Gulf coast; 
somewhere like Connecticut when a bridge or bulding collapse kills dozens 
of people; somewhere like Kansas when tornadoes rip up houses and house 
trailers, and people's bodies.

Opening records, reversing the regressive laws which keep adoptees from 
knowing:
    their medical histories and their predispositions to genetic disorders,
    their ethnic heritage and the anecdotes of their ancestors,
    the unseen but hauntingly familiar faces of their siblings,
    the names they were born with
is a simple matter of justice.

Birthparents and adoptees have experienced closed records as unjust, 
unreasonably rigid, divisive, oppressive, exploitive, demoralizing, 
discriminatory, paternalistic, inhumane, unnatural, vengeful, 
freedom-stealing, resource-sapping, anger-provoking, nightmare-prompting, 
corrosive to whatever level of self worth we've been able to painstakingly 
rebuild, and malignant growths upon our mental, emotional and physical 
health.

But value judgments aside, closed records are unworkable, unenforceable 
and, I hope, finally revolution inspiring.

Ironically, opponents of open records almost always mask their own 
self-righteous motives by blaming the "need" for confidentiality on 
birthparents, claiming that birthparents, and to a significantly lesser 
extent, adoptees, have to be shielded from the reopening of wounds.  But 
closed records keep our wounds open.  Closed records:
    patronize adoptees and birthparents,
    insult our intelligence,
    underestimate our capacity to grow and our determination to fulfill
      our responsibilities,
    freeze us forever, despite chronolgical age or gowth in maturity, in
      the disadvantage of childlike minority.
Closed records protect and insulate a sexist, racist, classist system which 
continues to harvest the children of the poor to supply the demands of 
those who can pay the most.

Laws which, by their very existence and by reflecting societal attitudes, 
generate shame and enforce secrecy -- and the men and women in government 
and in self seeking big-bucks groups who promulgate, promote and perpetuate 
such restrictive laws -- tell us that even though we might think we don't 
like what they're doing, they're doing it to us for our own good; tell us 
that they know what we need, better than we know what we need.  What they 
insist we need is dislocation, disorientation, suppression of the natural 
desire to know ourselves and our children, excision of our personal 
histories and our biological connectedness.  I take these ideas, without 
permission, from Robert Jay Lifton.

Lifton, now an expert on the effect of secrecy on adoptees, inspires me.  
From his writings, I first learned that closed records and record closers 
feed adoptees and unhealthful diet of fantasy lies to replace truth, 
beginning with falsification of the birth certificate and extending through 
childhood myths like the misbegotten "chosen child" story, to scare tactics 
like the "bad blood" ghost story, to recriminations like the "you're a 
whore just like your mother" horror story.

Experts on birthmothers, because they are birthmothers, inspire me too.  
From them I continue to learn that closed records and record closers warn 
birthmothers to hide our identities, hide the truth and substitute fantasy 
lies:
    because that way we can start a new life and have other children;
    because, after all, no decent man would ever want to marry a woman
      who gave away her own flesh and blood;
    because this baby isn't really ours, we just carried it for its
      real parents.
Closed records and record closers say to young women who are pregnant and 
without money or diplomas or parental or societal support:
    "If you really love this baby, you'll give it a good home;" or,
      heartlessly,
    "If you keep the baby, you'll probably end up abusing it;" or,
      sanctimoniously,
    "God gave you this baby, now you give it back to God."

Most insidously, record closers base the "need" for closed records on three 
interlocking bald-faced lies:

    1. The unctuous lie pronounced on numb birthparents who pale at the
       prospect of never knowing anything more about the children we
       have sacrificed:

                        YOU WILL FORGET.

    2. The pablum fed to inquisitive, if not depressed and emotionally
       isolated, adoptees:

       YOUR BIRTHPARENTS DON'T WANT THEIR LIVES DISRUPTED.

    3. The counterfeit balm sothed over adopters who are being inadequately
       counseled to deal with childlessness:

       FAMILIES CREATED THROUGH ADOPTION ARE JUST LIKE OTHER FAMILIES.

Closed records and record closers tell us that what we disconnected 
birthrelatives think we need -- the inalienable right to decide for 
ourselves whether we'll patch our severed genetic connections -- doesn't 
matter.

Maybe you think it does matter.  Maybe you think that we have the right to 
decide for ourselves what matters to us.

And maybe you know open records matter a great deal to adoptees, but you've 
bought into the common currency that birthparents still hve to be 
protected, that most birthparents are too fragile, too vulnerable or too 
psychologically inept to confront what might be the most traumatic 
experience of our lives.  People who ordain themselves to speak for 
birthparents, without our permission and with the claim that it is for our 
own good, project these and other debilities onto us.

That's why I'm standing here: to tell you to listen to us, not to self 
serving projections; to tell you that birthparents as a group don't need, 
never aske for, the disguise of closed records; we just had it forced upon 
us at a time when we were too frightened and confused and resourceless to 
protest.

The truth is, we birthparents need open records for many reasons.  Among 
them, for dispelling the shame that secrecy created, for reclaiming the 
self esteem we surrendered, and for ending the limbo half life of not 
knowing: whether our children our dead or alive, adopted or 
institutionalized, well adjusted to the disability of their status as 
adoptees or insecure, lonely misfits, trapped in families hung up on 
ancestor worship, on perpetuation of a prestigious paternal name, and on 
expectations of a fair return on adoption investments.

Birthparents keep trying to convince the record closers that we need open 
records.  No matter what we say, some of them never will be convinced.  But 
if we didn't need openness, would we come forward, undisguised, to testify 
for bills opening records?  Would up to 99 percent of us, depending on 
whose statistics you consult, agree to reunions with our searching 
birthchildren?  Would we repeatedly reopen our wounds and spill our guts to 
newspaper and television reporters so that others won't be forced to repeat 
our mistakes and live out their lives in hell?

I'm not claiming that there are no birthparents anywhere who would be 
pained at the prospect of open records; a few will be pained, at least at 
the prospect.  But, regardless of birthparents' fears, adoptees' access to 
their birth records, like their access to equal opportunity or to equal 
protection under the law or to basic medical care, is a simple matter of 
justice, a right which no other person should be able to contravene.

As a group, birthparents too need and deserve open records not only because 
we need to know whether our children are among the murder victims on the 
shrouded stretchers, but also because we're panicked that they could nned 
us, but have doors and file cabinets slammed closed in their faces if they 
try to contact us.  We're panicked that, at any given moment, they could be 
among the living wounded, among the statistical minority of adoptee-victims 
of unrelenting (reported and unreported) abuses.  After all, adoptees make 
up a disproportionate percentage of adolescents in programs for drug 
abusers, for the emotionally disturbed and for juvenile offenders.

Sometimes we find them, or they find us -- not frequently, but often enough 
to fuel our worst nightmares -- and can't one Joel Steinberg fuel a million 
nightmares? -- in homes where they've been covertly unloved and overtly 
rejected and battered and sexually abused and burdened with mental and 
physical handicaps that have been untreated or inadequately treated.  So 
what do we do?

So how do we banish the nightmares and escape the suffocating little hells?

We can start by turning a deaf ear to the predictable self serving cries of 
"Pandora's box" and "can of worms."  We accept as a given that closed 
records are a cruel and unusual punishment for the crime of unplanned 
pregnancies, a punishment borne disproportionaley by women and children.  
We dedicate ourselves to the proposition that all people have the 
unconditional right to know all their birthrelatives whenever they choose.  
We reeducate the record closers to disprove the three interlocking 
bald-faced lies.  We march on Washington.  We commit all our energies and 
resources to what in this country will be a radical change: unconditionally 
open records.

Yes, you hear me right -- unconditionally open.  I'm not standing here 
reopening my wounds and spilling my guts to promote opening records with 
parental consent only, or to adults only, or to adoptees only.  Those 
records aren't open, they're barely ajar, and they're not worth bleeding 
for.

So if your goal, like mine, in unconditionally open records, don't leave me 
standing here bleeding by myself.  I'm warning you, if I'm left to bleed by 
myself, the record closers will just come along, mop up the gory mess (to 
make it as invisible and as sanitary as a sealed record) and move on to 
their next cruel and unusual tyranny.

Will you help?  Will you bleed?  Will you stand up and make your voice 
(sometimes your ingratiating voice) hard, and will you put your body on the 
front line: in front of the microphone at the witness table, in front of 
the camera, on the front page -- no matter how much witness tables and 
cameras and microphones and contentious interviewers distress you?  Will 
you surrender the repression and denial that for a time insulated you from 
pain (but at an exorbitant price) and, with me, trade your solitary 
confinement hell in on a more conspicuous, cooperative, perhaps even 
conspiratorial public hell -- starting here, starting now?


P.S. Even in no one ever is bribed or blackmailed into surrendering to 
     adoption again, even if the percentage of women surrendering to
     adoption seems to be decreasing, you and I must be willing to bleed
     because we know closed records and record closers don't limit their
     vengeance to relatives separated by adoption.  I'm warning you, even
     when closed adoption ends, record closers will continue to wreak
     vengeance in all our lives in another way, in a virulent new form:
     identity-destroying reproductive technologies.

     Every time a man fills a vial with his anonymous sperm, collects his
     $40 and disappears without considering the human, the oh-so-human,
     consequences; every time a resourceless surrogate opens her legs to
     the syringe containing the anonymous sperm; every time a desperate
     couple "donates" an anonymous IVF-produced embryo with the hope of
     having their own fertility problem corrected in return; every time the 
     medical/industrial/commericial complex of baby commodifiers buys
     another anonymous third world breeder, we will all hve to cringe or
     panic at the certain knowledge that these reproductive manipulations
     soon will begin to backfire.  As closed records in this country's
     exploitative experiment in adoption are beginning to backfire now.

    The National Organization for Birthfathers and Adoption Reform
                            (NOBAR)
    
    NOBAR is a national resource and advocacy organization for birthfathers
    (fathers who have been separated from their children by adoption) and
    others whose life and family have been, or may be affected by adoption.
    While our work concentrates on male issues in adoption, women are
    central to the adoption process and their involvement is important to
    us.  We also invite participation by adoption professionals who strive
    to make the institution of adoption more humane.
    
    For more information about NOBAR please send a SASE to: NOBAR, P.O. Box
    1993, Baltimore, MD  21203-1993.
    
    "The Birthfather's Advocate" is the official publication of NOBAR.  It
    is available only to members of NOBAR.  Membership information may be
    obtained by writing NOBAR, P.O. Box 1553, Rochester, N.H. 03867.
    

    Laura,
      It is hard to seperate the author's negativity about closed records
    from her negativity about adoption in general, as well as reproduction 
    technologies.  Your entries have really helped me to appreciate
    a persons right to their own birth identity, and to a lesser extent
    the right of a birthparent to know what happened to their offspring.
    One problem is that now the courts seem to believe a biological parent
    has an irrevocable right to parent their offspring.  In the case
    of open adoptions, I can foresee cases where the biological parent
    would change their mind and harass the adoptive family.  Would the
    courts be willing to put a restraining order on that person, or
    would they give them visitation rights?
      Also, one interesting development with donor insemination is that
    there is a sperm bank in California that has donors who agree their 
    identity can be revealed when the child is 18.  There is some risk
    that the donor will not keep in touch with the sperm bank, but at
    least his name, personal history, and last known address will be
    given.
    	Linda

    I recently read about an open adoption situation where the birthmother
    arranged beforehand to continue her contact with the birthparents and
    with the child.  But after the child was born, the birthmother's mother
    came into the picture:  enter Grandma.  Now, Grandma did not for one
    minute acknowledge that anyone other than her daughter could possibly
    be the mother of that child.  At first, when talking to the child, she
    referred to her daughter as "Mother."  Later, when challenged by the
    adoptive parents and threatened with court action, she began referring
    to her daughter as "Mother Number 1" and the adoptive mother as "Mother
    Number 2."  As the child grew older, there was a lot of confusion about
    who Mama really was.  The adoptive parents went through a veritable
    nightmare for several years before they finally got the situation
    corrected. 
    
    I can agree wholeheartedly that the identity of the birthparents should
    be made available to an adoptee after that adoptee becomes an adult, ON
    THE CONDITION THAT BOTH THE ADOPTEE AND THE BIRTHPARENT WISH TO BE
    IDENTIFIED TO EACH OTHER.  Organizations exist now that allow both
    parties to register their desire to find the other. When that happens,
    all records should be made available in my opinion. 
    
    But legally mandating that all adoptions be open from the beginning??
    I'm sorry, I just can't agree.
    
    As far as AI and IVF, I fail to see how such procedures can be anything
    other than a wonderful alternative for childless couples, and a
    chance for a child to be born into a loving home who otherwise would
    never have been conceived.  The only drawback to surrogacy, IMHO,
    is the legal aspects, and those are certainly artificial.
    
    							Pat

    See the  Ann Lander's column in today's Boston Globe for a bizzare
    case  of  a child seeking out the birth mother and Ann's continued
    opposition to allowing children to find their birth parents.

--David

    David, do you have a special edition of today's Globe?
    
    I've looked in Annie's (she and I are good buddies, you know :-) )
    column 4 times, but I still don't see anything like you describe.
    
      Alan

    Alan,
    
    I read it too, but I think David maybe reading yesteday's paper.
    
    :-)
    
    Bonnie

    Re: .126
    
    >>See the  Ann Lander's column in today's Boston Globe for a bizzare
    >>case  of  a child seeking out the birth mother and Ann's continued
    >>opposition to allowing children to find their birth parents.
    
    Well, it really doesn't matter which day of the week the column ran.
    
    I think that Ann Lander's has the same three adoption/search letters
    that she resurrects on some kind of a regular schedule:
    
    Ann Lander's bizzare adoption search - CASE 1:
    
    Adoptee searches for birthmother, birthmother is mean and rejects
    adoptee, adoptee is devasted and his/her life is ruined.
    
    Ann Lander's bizzare adoption search - CASE 2:
    
    Birthmother searches for birthchild, he/she rejects birthmother,
    birthmother is devasted and her life is ruined.
    
    Ann Lander's bizzare adoption search - CASE 3:
    
    Somebody searches for the other person, if the adoptee is male, he
    marries/goes to bed with/murders  his sister/birthmother/adoptive 
    mother; if the adoptee is female she marries/goes to bed with/murders
    her brother/birthfather/adoptive father and everyone's lives are
    ruined. (This is the national enquirer, multiple choose your own
    sensationalized story.) 
    
    Do any of these sound familiar....?
    
    The unfortunate thing about this, though, is that some people actually
    believe what she writes and then can only see this as the potential
    outcome for any search.  
    
    Laura
    

    Sorry if  I  mislead  you  on  the date. I'm often a little behind
    schedule.  The reason I specified a paper is that her column often
    runs  on  different  days in different papers (and often different
    collections of answers run together).  

--David

    Laura,
    
    The particular Ann Landers story was none of those that you
    mentioned.
    
    It was the case of a woman whose husband was the child's birth
    father. She birth daughter separated from her husband and moved
    to be near her birth father, bringing her child. The father started
    visiting his daughter every night and eventually the couple separated
    (leaving the wife and her two kids - his step kids) and the
    father moved in with his daughter.
    
    and I think that you do Ann Landers an injustice. She has been known
    to change her mind with the times (such attitudes as premarital
    sex for adults, or divorce, or homosexuality are three that come
    to mind) and this is largely a result of the impact of the letters
    that she receives. I'd be willing to bet that she has recieved
    lots of letters on adoption searches. However, since it is largely
    troubled people who write to her, it is quite likely that she
    only or largely gets mail from those who have had a bad experience.
    
    Perhaps one of us should write her and challenge her to another
    of her famous 'post card' surveys. Ask her to ask in her column
    (I almost wrote 'file' :-) ) if a person is adopted, if they
    ever searched and were they happy, and if a person gave a child
    up or had their child given up (male) for adoption if they have
    searched or would welcome a searcher.
    
    Bonnie

    Re: .125
    
    >>I recently read about an open adoption situation where the birthmother
    >>arranged beforehand to continue her contact with the birthparents and
    >>with the child.  
    >>As the child grew older, there was a lot of confusion about
    >>who Mama really was.  The adoptive parents went through a veritable
    >>nightmare for several years before they finally got the situation
    >>corrected. 
    
I think that this is, perhaps, a case of an open adoption not being handled 
in a proper manner.  I think that I need to supply some definitions of what 
I believe constitutes an open adoption that is handled in a manner that is, 
first, in the best interest of the child, and second, in the best interest 
of the adults.

To start, I think an sound open adoption begins when the birthmother can 
freely choose who will be the adoptive parents of her child.  I think that 
the birthmother should have an opportunity to meet the prospective parents, 
if she so desires, and that, at a minimum, a very thorough medical history 
of the birthmother (and hopefully, the birthfather) be placed in the 
hands of the adoptive parents and another copy be placed in the file at the 
agency.  This way, if the parents change their mind about sharing this 
information with their child when she or he is older, the adoptee can then 
contact the agency for information that s/he has every right to obtain.

Once the birthmother signs the termination of parental rights, she needs to 
walk away from the situation for a while in order to give the adoptive 
parents and child time to bond.  I think that it is reasonable to keep the 
birthmother informed of the child's progress via pictures and letters, but 
that face to face contact should be restricted.  Even if the birthmother is 
not in the picture, there is no hard and fast guarantee that the adoptee 
will bond with his/her adoptive family.  However, every chance should be 
given to facilitate this bonding process, including making sure that the 
adoptee can clearly identify who his/her parents are in the situation. 

Not all young women who decide to relinquish their children for adoption are 
emotionally ready or able out carry out the responsibilities that come with 
open adoption.  There are also varying degrees within an open adoption, and 
I think that these options should be explored.  In all cases, I feel that 
adoptees should be given honest and open answers to the questions they ask. 
Most kids won't ask about something until they are ready to hear about it.  
Although, we do pick up cues from our parents re: how comfortable they are 
about talking about certain situations.  I learned, mostly from non-verbal 
cues at a *very* early age that there were two topics in my house that were 
strictly taboo...asking about my adoption and asking about sex.
    
    >>I can agree wholeheartedly that the identity of the birthparents should
    >>be made available to an adoptee after that adoptee becomes an adult, ON
    >>THE CONDITION THAT BOTH THE ADOPTEE AND THE BIRTHPARENT WISH TO BE
    >>IDENTIFIED TO EACH OTHER.  

Under no circumstances should any adoption records be closed.  I feel that once
the child turns legal age, both adoptee and birthparents should have equal 
access to the information.  Once everybody is an adult, we can all make 
decisions about our lives and our relationships.  There are stories of 
adoptees being found and refusing to meet their birthparents...the adoptee 
can say no (although I think it's somewhat heartless).  And there are 
stories of birthparents being found and refusing to meet their biological 
child (again, I think it's somewhat heartless).  But as adults, everybody 
gets to decide what they want to do and then be accountable for their 
actions.  To put some kind of conditions on who can see the records, and 
when, keeps adoptees in a perpetual state of childhood.  People even refer 
to adult adoptees as adopted *children*.  Do we not ever have the right to 
full adulthood and the responsibilities that go with it.  I don't think 
that any law maker or social service agency has the right to genetically 
sever adoptees from their roots.

    >>But legally mandating that all adoptions be open from the beginning??
    >>I'm sorry, I just can't agree.
    
I think that Paula was talking more about having laws that would recognize 
open adoptions as a legal and binding.  Right now, an open adoption depends 
on the continued good will of the adoptive parents.  Technically, if the 
adoptive parents were to decide that they no longer wanted to send updates 
to the birthmother regarding the progress of the child, the birthmother 
would have no legal recourse because she has terminated her parental 
rights.  Even though she agreed to terminate parental rights based on an 
open adoption agreement, there are no laws to ensure that this agreement 
between adoptive parents and birthmother continue to be honored.

    >>The only drawback to surrogacy, IMHO,
    >>is the legal aspects, and those are certainly artificial.
    
There are infinitely more complicated issues to surrogate births and 
adoptions than just legal aspects.  What makes the surrogate child any 
different than selling a piece of real-estate or some other material thing 
for a profit?  In the case of women who are dealing with unplanned or 
untimely pregnancies, and who are without financial and family supports to 
help them, adoption, if done humanely, can be a very loving and positive 
alternative.  What is humane about a woman who willfully gets pregnant and 
then sells her child?  What will that do to the child's self-esteem once he 
or she reaches adulthood, or reaches an understanding about the meaning of 
a surrogate birth?  How much more secrecy and silence will surrogate 
birthing create, justified by saying that it is in the best interest of the 
child to shield him or her from the mercenary and ego-maniacal roots of 
his/her beginning?  

An article that was printed in either Time or Newsweek (I don't remember 
which) that came out during the Marybeth Whitehead case, ran an interview 
with several surrogate mothers, one of whom talked about wanting to be able 
to afford private school for the two children that she already was raising 
(as a single parent) and had decided to go through with two surrogate 
births so she could afford the private school tuition.  Surrogate birth 
practices, thus far, have done nothing positive for the children being 
born (it will be interesting to see how "Baby M" views herself when she 
reaches her teen years) and have continued the practice of exploiting poor 
women.  Rich women aren't putting their wombs up for rent.  Poor women or 
economically disadvantaged women are.  Surrogate birthing is nothing short 
of slavery in the 20th century.  The difference here is that the people who 
are being bought and sold happen to be (mainly) Caucasian infants.  

Michael Chamberlain, a Manchester, N.H. attorney who 15 years ago wrote New 
Hampshire's adoption laws, has pointed out that the issue of surrogacy has 
to do with the commercialization of motherhood and the effects that such a 
contract will have on the children and parents involved.  While he views 
reimbursing a mother for expenses involved in an unplanned pregnancy and 
childbirth as "a different matter," he contends that paying a woman for the 
use of her womb "smacks of baby-selling and profiteering."

Elizabeth Bartholet, a professor at Harvard Law School, has said this about 
surrogacy, "I would criminalize surrogacy, because as I look at the various 
parties I see affected by surrogacy, it seems to me it's not a good thing 
and indeed it's a very bad thing.  I don't think using money to get women 
to bear children and give them up is a good thing and is akin in my view 
only with slavery.  We don't allow people voluntarily to enter a state of 
slavery in this country and I don't think we should let them voluntarily 
enter into surrogacy either.  The explanations made in the surrogacy 
context are not as easy to deal with as the explanations involved in 
adoption."

Laura

    I really enjoy reading Laura Ervin's notes on this subject.  She
    speaks in a clear, calm way.  I agree with just about everything
    she has to say on this.  
    
    Laura, in a case where a women is raped but chooses to live out the
    pregnancy and give up the child for her emotional state of mind what
    would you recommend?  Still an open adoption as described in .133?
    but where the women would ask not to be contacted?  I see this as the
    only upset in an open adoption.  She'd have to relive the rape once
    again if she was ever contacted.  After all, it's not the child's
    fault.  And if it was a closed adoption whereas all others are open,
    the child would probably take it all too personal.  
    
    Surrogacy, IMO is baby selling.  It's slavery and it shouldn't be
    allowed in any case.  But then I think about, what if it was kept
    within a family.  Like if I would (I would never, just supposing here)
    have a baby for my twin sister?  Should we let that happen?  One
    thing about Baby M is that she knows her birth mother and calls her
    Mommy along with calling her father's wife Mommy.  When she grows up
    she'll know that her birthmother didn't sell her and does want her,
    just that she made a large mistake.  How would other surrogate children
    feel though when they've learned that they cost only $10,000????
    Surrogacy is taking advantage of poor women to benefit the rich women.
    Baby M will know that her birthmother wants her and her father's wife
    didn't want to bother helping to create her.  After all, she is not
    infertile, I believe she was lazy and selfish.  IMO
    
    Anna
    

    Re -.1
    
    "Baby M will know...her father's wife didn't want to bother helping
    to create her."
    
    I don't think that's the case.  I think she (the birthfather's wife,
    don't remember her name) entered into this arrangement because she
    was UNABLE to conceive...and I think that's true in most surrogate 
    cases.  Maybe what Baby M will grow up knowing is that this woman 
    wanted her very badly and was willing to try unconventional methods
    and to fight in court to have her.
           
    I have not really sorted out just where I stand on surrogacy.  (Laura's
    and others' notes are very helpful in this regard.)  I do know that
    that I am not ready to condemn the motives of all couples who want a
    baby with at least some genetic ties to them, or of all women who
    choose to help them achieve that through surrogacy.
    
    -Tracy
               
           
           
           
           

re: .134
        
    >>Laura, in a case where a women is raped but chooses to live out the
    >>pregnancy and give up the child for her emotional state of mind what
    >>would you recommend?  Still an open adoption as described in .133?
    >>but where the women would ask not to be contacted?  
    
Interesting question, Anna.  Well, I still think that the woman who is 
pregnant should get to decide how the adoption will be conducted.  For 
instance, if she wants to be able to choose the adoptive parents, that she 
be allowed.  If she doesn't want to have anything to do with choosing the 
parents and is willing to leave it up to the judgement of an adoption 
agency, fine too.  I think in this kind of a case it is even more critical 
for all parties concerned to be very sensitive to the needs of the 
birthmother.  It is certainly hard to second-guess what this woman would be 
feeling about carrying a child conceived because of rape.  It could be very 
painful for her to know anything about this child.  It could be very 
healing for her to things about the child.  Hard to say.  But if those 
involved are willing to stay open to the feelings and needs that come up in 
this situation, then I think that people can get through the very hard 
stuff.

    >>She'd have to relive the rape once
    >>again if she was ever contacted.  

Well, the birthmother might indeed relive the rape, although I am sure that 
there are plenty of things in day to day life that cause women who have 
been raped to relive the experience.  Closed adoptions don't mean that 
adoptees and birthparents can't find each other...it just makes it more 
difficult and costly.  So a closed adoption, in this case, is no protection 
for anyone.  If the adult adoptee wants to search and find, s/he will be 
successful.  It took me $250, plus many long distance phone calls, plus 
many trips to Connecticut and 4 months of effort to find my birthfamily, 
but I did find them.  My adoption was a traditional closed adoption with 
all records 'safely' sealed to protect me/birthparents/adoptive parents.  I 
am always left wondering why it is that the adoption workers and law makers 
feel the need to protect us from our own flesh and blood connections?

    
    >>Surrogacy, IMO is baby selling.  It's slavery and it shouldn't be
    >>allowed in any case.  But then I think about, what if it was kept
    >>within a family.  Like if I would (I would never, just supposing here)
    >>have a baby for my twin sister?  Should we let that happen?  

Another interesting question, Anna.  Now, think about it from the point of 
view as the child who has been given to someone else, even if s/he has been 
given to another family member.  There is a very real bond that happens 
in-utero and I think that even with no money involved and the best 
intentions and the child being adopted by another family member, a 
surrogate birth would be a terrible hardship for that child to bear.  No 
matter how you cut it, the bottom line is that the child's mother has 
willingly and willfully gotten pregnant with the full intention of giving 
the child away.  It is almost like an indictment that your biological 
mother never wanted you.  Also keep in mind that the purpose of adoption is 
to provide homes for homeless children, not provide babies to childless 
couples...it we are viewing adoption as being in the best interest of the 
child.  Before the days of reproduction high-tech, when a doctor informed a 
couple that there was an infertility problem, that was that.  The couple 
could then (hopefully) begin their process of dealing with the infertility 
and grieve the loss of the child they had hoped to have, but then move 
forward and make a choice re: to adopt or not adopt.  In some ways I feel 
that the pre-high-tech days were better.

    >>One
    >>thing about Baby M is that she knows her birth mother and calls her
    >>Mommy along with calling her father's wife Mommy.  When she grows up
    >>she'll know that her birthmother didn't sell her and does want her,
    >>just that she made a large mistake.  

Yes, I feel that in some ways it was very positive that Marybeth changed 
her mind and fought to keep her child.  No doubt, it will still be tough 
road for this child.

    >>Baby M will know that her birthmother wants her and her father's wife
    >>didn't want to bother helping to create her.  After all, she is not
    >>infertile, I believe she was lazy and selfish.  IMO
    
Actually, I thought that infertility was the reason why the Sterns were 
going the route of surrogate birth.

Laura
    

    .135
    
    No, I'm correct.  It was revealed in court that Elizabeth Stern is
    not infertile.  She, being a doctor, self diagnosed herself with a
    very mild case of MS.  She can very well get pregnant.  She just 
    has a slight chance of aggravating her MS should she get pregnant.
    IMO, she had no business getting into a surrogacy situation (although
    I believe no one has any business getting into a surrogacy situation)
    but Bill Stern wanted a baby of his own blood so badly, his wife
    used surrogacy as her only way to get a baby.  They had never even
    tried adoption procedures, from what I've read.  Bill Stern has no
    family anywhere with his own blood which is why it was so important
    for him.  Marybeth Whitehead Gloud used Elizabeth Stern's fertility
    as her only defense to keep her child.  Anyways, enough of that,...
    I don't like ratholes.....It's just that this case was very important
    to me and actually still is.  I read everything I can about it.
    
    .136,  Yes, I agree open adoption is the only humane way of doing it.
    But each case should be allowed to be handled individually.
    
    Surrogate contracts only protect the adoptive parents, not the
    surrogate mother or the child itself.  The adoptive parents are allowed
    to terminate the pregnancy should any test show something 'wrong' with
    the baby.  It also states that if the pregnancy doesn't terminate due
    to the surrogate mother insisting on it, that the biological father
    can give up all support to the child.  I believe the lawyers are the
    ones that turned this option into baby selling/in-humane.
    
    Anna
    
    
    

    Hi my Name is Lise and I am on two sides of the tri-angle and facing
    maybe all three sides, but let me tell you about me.
    
      I was born ao 4/19/61 providence R.I. and went Placed into my
    adoptive home 4/22/62. What happened that first year I have no idea.
      My older brother  (Adopted) Jay was alredy there maybe about 1
    year or a little more. Resentment already on his part. I became
    Daddy's little girl. they named me Lise Joan. already I was different
    x2 first being adopted and the spelling of my first name.
      About 1/2 years later my younger brother (adopted) cam eto join
    us! We got along great!
      We moved a couple times and finally setled in MA when I was 5
    1/2.
      I grew up in a middle upper class, never laked materially but
    never really saw hugs or kisses except at bedtime. i never
    grew up close to my older brother but my younger brother and I 
    real "Buddies". We had our fights and protected each other. I can't
    ask for a better brother!
      I started having a rough childhood about the age of 12 or thirteen.
    I was being molested by my neighbor, I started drinking and started
    doing lousy in school. Great!
      By the time I was 14 I was addicted to Alcohol, my drug of choice.
    My brothers were excelling and I was failing. I did not feel like
    I was a part of this family, Everybody including my parents were
    good at somethng and it seemed to me all I could do is get in trouble.
    So I use to be proud that I could get in trouble.
      Life goes on.... Found out I was adopted at the age of 12 I read
    my baby book and the phrase " the day you came home yu were already
    dressed finally ment something to me."
      At the age of 17 I finally had enough my my neighbor and his threats
    didn't scare me anymore! I threatened him with the police and he
    stopped!
      At the age of 20 on 8/30/81 I gave birth to a healthy baby boy.
    I named him Taylor Yorke......... I aslo signed his adoption papers
    when he was 17 days old.  The reason: My Booze! I knew I still wanted
    to drink that I hadn't enough, that If I kept this baby the state
    would have him in 3 months or less due to neglect. I also knew
    that when he was 14 and I was 34 I wouldn't be able to answer his
    questins right because I was too immuture. My parents also pressured
    me into this decision, the social worker and the gbyn never told
    me about the loss feeling I would have later. The Pain that sears
    deep into my heart sometimes late at night, even today.
      363 days later I lost my second baby in a miscarriage and
    on June 13,89 I lost my 3rd in a tublar.
    
       The dr.'s don't ever know if I'll ever have children again because
    my other tube is so bad. They have told me to start thinking in-Vitro.
    
      I asked my mother once about my bio and the guilt hurt and many
    other emotions that flashed over face is still vivid in my mind
    and I won't bring up that issue again with her.
      
      I went own to the agency in R.I. with a close friend and they
    told me all int non identifing info, but won't act as a go between,
    or even tell my bio that I am interested about her. The laws prevent
    that. I bawled like a baby all the way home.
      My brothers have no urge to search. Just me.
    
    It really hit me when I came down stairs one morning to see a man
    who resembled my father, and then to see them side by side, God
    it was eerie to see family resemblence. You could tellthey were
    family. 
    
    I started again who do I look Like, Have I inhereted anybody's looks,
    disposition, smile, etc? Is anybody short like me?
    
    I someday hope R.I.'s laws change.
    I do not want to disturb her if she doesn't want to be disturbed.
    
    But for me  I know the anniversary of the birthdate knowing flesh
    of my flesh is still growing, in school starting 2nd or 3rd grade
    this year. learning abut the outside world, knowing what Mother's
    Day without that child. I know the lies that Society wants to me
    to believe, and to tell. They want me to forget that I ever had
    this child. To Treat my next born as my 1st child. Well tell me
    people just how do you forget that somewhere in this world you have
    a child that you gave birth to? I have scars of growth, memories of 
    happiness,how do you forget about when your insides kicked your
    outsides?
      I am not yelling just mad that I have to forget! Just hurt that
    Peopel tell me that's it's best for me to " Pretend that it never
    happened??"
      As for being an adoptee I am damm proud of it! I got a second
    chance at a life, my mom could have had a back street abortin, but
    didn't. she endured shame and guilt in a time when unwanted pregnancies
    were unheard of! I know her pain when it came time for that final
    good-bye, I know of her tears, I now know of her wondering through
    her life if I am okay. 
      If I could somehow just get to her a letter telling her I understand
    maybe not her reasons but her feelings, that it's okay and I love
    her even though I never met her I would.
      This woman who gave birth to me is also a motheer but in a different
    mother to me. she's the one where I all started she was there in
    mental help.
     My adoptive mom is ans was there physically and also mentally for
    me all these years. To Both of these moms I love them the same!
    
    Lise K.
    youu couldn't look past your belly?

    Hi Lise,
    
    I'm glad that you have joined this discussion.  Your experiences offer
    a unique perspective since you are an adoptee, a birthmother and a
    woman who is considering adoption as a way for you to have child.
    
    Every time I read articles written by people who are not a part of the
    adoption triad, I realize that they don't have a clue that adoption is
    a life-long issue.  It is not a simple issue, it is not an easy
    solution to an untimely pregnancy.  
    
    Lately all my issues are up and active.  I am approaching the
    anniversary of the death of my birthmother.  This August 10th it will
    be 18 years.  I will write more about this later.
    
    Laura
    

Yesterday I was having a conversation with a friend of mine who is an 
adoptee and a birthmother.  Having made initial contact with her 
birthmother, my friend was explaining that her birthmother has stopped 
contact and was talking about her feelings.

As I sat there with this friend of mine and she talked about her anger, and 
about being tired of being everyone's secret, it put me in touch with 
feelings that I have been avoiding for quite some time.

I have been asked, on several occassions and by different people, "Where is 
your anger, Laura?"  I hear the question and I imagine that a blank look 
comes over my face and emotionally, I exit out a side door.

So my friend was saying yesterday that she really needs to be able to 
process with her birthmother, tell her that she is angry for having been 
given away (even though intellectually she knows she had a better life 
growing up with her adoptive family).  And she says that she will keep 
searching for the child she relinquished because she, as a birthmother, 
needs to let her daughter know that she has a right to be angry at being 
given away. 

And then my friend acknowledges the difficult task I have of being able to 
get in touch with my anger while I am grieving the death of my birthmother. 
She is not here so I/we cannot process this face to face.  

My adoptee friend says, "I want to ask my birthmother why she didn't come 
looking for me.  I'm angry that she did not look for me."  And I think to 
myself, how can I be angry at Anita for not searching?  She died before any 
search agencies existed.  I was only 16 when she died.  Even if there had 
been search agencies to help her, they wouldn't have helped her search until I 
was legal age (18).

I have been going around and around in my grief for nearly 4 years.  Maybe 
the grieving has changed during these years, although I can't see any 
change and can't feel it any differently.  Maybe not being able to 
acknowledge and feel my anger keeps me stuck.  I continue to write in my 
journal.  I stay active with adoptees and birthmothers.  I write to Anita 
and move a little bit closer to my anger.  But feeling the anger seems like 
a dangerous proposition.  The tenuous connection I feel with Anita might be 
permanently severed if I were to feel all my feelings.  I see that in a 
recent letter written to my birthmother.

                  ****************************


Dear Anita,

I am sitting here tonight thinking about all the ways in which you are in 
my life, perhaps not in the form I want, but you are very present to me.

Unlike the times when I seek you out for advice and counsel and seem to 
know exactly what I need and how to ask for it, tonight I haven't a clue 
why I feel the need to write to you, or what I'm even going to put down on 
paper.

I will be getting some help, you will be pleased to know, with not staying 
stuck in my grief.  However, I fear that if I were to let go of the grief, 
I would be letting go of you, I would be losing you yet one more time.  I 
don't have it in me, my dear mother, to deal with losing you again.

I feel that I have missed so much in this life and lost more than I can 
bear.  I hang onto the words of those stories told by family members 
recalling your life, pointing out your charms, your magic; the personality, 
the person that everyone loved.  And I, too, fall prey to your charms even 
when I feel I could rage, my fury full force.  Instead I write a love 
letter to you.

I stand before your grave stone and in my fury I want to smash it into 
pieces, instead, I find myself disarmed of my anger.  I do not beat the 
stone with my fists; I drown it with my tears.

I miss you in a way that has no language.  There are no earthly concepts 
for what I feel and how I miss you.  My cells cry out.  I've lost a 
critical element of my DNA.  I could unravel or disconnect at the seams.  

I have days when I trust in your help so implicitly that I would bet my 
life on it.  And I have days when the total and overwhelming sense of 
abandonment consumes me and not only do I not trust you, I do not trust 
myself.  

How can I ask you for help in the times when I can't even find you?...When 
I can't make the connection with you?...When I am paralyzed with my own 
despair?

                     **********************

And so it goes.  I grapple with this and feel that I am going nowhere fast. 
The moments of acceptance are real.  The moments of despair are also real.

I am at another bottom with my grief.  I think to myself, "This time it 
will be different."  And maybe it will be different this time.  

Laura
                              

    Laura,
      Thank-You for the warm welcome.
    
    As a birthmother and an adoptee I am also tired of "SECRETS". I
    am alive so I can't be that much of a secret.
    
    As a birthmother I can tell you, the birthmother never forgets!
    It has been almost 8 years since my son's birth and  little over
    28 years since my own birth. There are reminders of my (my?) son's
    exsistence. the sound of children on a summer evening's, the cry
    of a child in distress. the stretch marks that my body will carry
    for life with the only life I'll probably ever carry.
      Laura, I know for me I can never forget the alot of the little
    things that happeened to me as a person when I caried this little
    tyke around with me.
    
    I just talked with my agency in R.I. with help of a agency in MA
    I can get all of my non idenifing info. and the agency in MA may
    help me search! But I try not to get my hopes up YET!
    
    Laura, 
    
       The best I can say is know that in yor heart your bio did the
    best for you and in that is the greatest love of all. She gave her
    chance of being able to see yu grow up to have someone else take
    her role! My son never leaves my heart, In it there is a place that
    is only for him. I have a picture of him taken when he was 2 1/2
    days old and people think he's me!
      Jut remember the greatest love your bio mother could give you
    she did.
    
    Lise K.

    Several of my friends have had excellent luck with "Concerned United
    Birthparents".  From what I hear they provide support for the feelings
    involved as you go through this process and search strategies.  For a
    set fee, I think you can join, receive periodic mailings, and get
    specific help with your search. 
    
    Laura Ervin would have the address.
    
    With my genealogist hat on, I'd also think you should start by
    assembling any documentation you were given at the time of the
    adoption.  Try to write down any comments that were made to you
    by clergy or people at the agency.  If it was a private adoption,
    think about anyone who was involved.  It's really important to write
    down everything you remember *before* you start an official search,
    I think.  Write down your impressions as you remember them at the
    time of the adoption.
    
    Do you know what state the child's adoptive family was in?  And
    how long ago was it?  There may be some hospital records, or vital
    records that you could request - sometimes, by accident, people
    get full records when they were supposed to get amended records.
    
    Good luck in your search!  I have run into both adoptees and
    birthparents while doing genealogical searching, and have always
    enjoyed helping them find their way through the vital records maze.
    
    Holly
    

    Terry,
    
    I would suggest that you write to your agency. Agency attitudes
    have changed greatly in the past 18 years. The agency that placed
    my children with me now does reunions. They will keep on file
    letters from the birthparent(s) and the adopted child and if
    both write they will facilitate contact.
    
    It is worth a try.
    
    Bonnie

    Hi Terry,
    
    I have been in all-day meetings for the past three days, and it was
    Holly who told me that you had checked into this notes string.
    
    How you might begin your search depends on where you live now and in
    what State you lived at the time of surrender.
    
    To start, I would not contact the agency that handled the adoption
    until you get some information about them and there current attituded. 
    Since you don't know if the agency that handled your daughter's
    adoption has supportive attitudes towards birthmothers and adoptees, I
    can tell you from experience, that if the agency treats you badly on
    your first venture out into these waters, it will hurt a lot.  It helps
    to be already connected to a support network before you bump against
    potentially unsupportive or judgemental institutions or individuals.
    
    The address for Concerned United Birthparents (CUB) is 2000 Walker
    Street, Des Moines, Iowa, 50317.  This is the address for CUB National,
    a woman by the name of Janet Fenton is the president.  She is a
    wonderful woman and I am friends with her and her birth daughter.  If
    you want someone to talk to soon, call Janet at 515-263-9541 or
    515-262-9120 and tell her I told you to call.  Another possibility
    would talk to Meredith (Merry) Prosser who is the vice-president of CUB
    national and who is very active in the local Massachusetts chapter. 
    Another friend of mine, her number is 617328-6747.
    
    I have some materials that I can send you if you want.  It would be
    helpful to know where you currently live, where your daughter was born
    and into what State she was adopted.  You can probably get your records
    from the hospital, if you play your cards right.  This is where search
    and support groups become very helpful.  They know how to do these
    things and how to coach us to get at the information that we have a
    right to know, but which is still systematically withheld from us. 
    There are ways around the system :-).
    
    There is also The Adoption Connection in Peabody, Ma, but since I don't
    know where you are (I didn't check elf before I started this reply) I
    won't get into too many detail.  Please call me or drop some vaxmail
    and we can go over any specifics.
    
    My dtn is 276-8470.  I will be in the office all day on Friday the 28th
    of July and on Monday and Tuesday the 31st and August 1. 
    
    You have a right to search.  You have a right to know about your
    daughter.  Since I have already done my search, and I know what a
    roller coaster of emotions it is, I urge you to tap into whatever
    support is available before you take more steps.
    
    I hope to hear from you soon.
    
    Warm regards,
    
    Laura
    

    Hi,
     I would like very much to start going to support groups in the
    Hudson Ma area. But I have one problem, I am a lousy night time
    driver, due to my night vision. Can anybody be of help? I am interested
    in going as I have just requested help from my agency to send my
    any and all info concerning my birth and my file.
    
      And after reading .146 I do realize that I will need emotional
    support, where I won't get it from my boyfriend or my family.
    
    Again looking to know if anybody can help bu giving me a ride, I
    am willing to help pay for gas etc. 
    
    Thaxnxs,
    
    Lise

    Hi Lise,
    
     >>I would like very much to start going to support groups in the
    >>Hudson Ma area. But I have one problem, I am a lousy night time
    >>driver, due to my night vision.
    
    Both Concerned United Birthparents (CUB) and The Adoption Connection
    (TAC) sponsor monthly support groups that are held Sept. through June. 
    Fortunately, these meetings are held on Sunday afternoons...CUB meets
    in Quincy, MA on the 4th Sunday of the month and TAC meets in the
    Newton/Cambridge area on the 2nd Sunday of the month.  So, if you don't
    have any problems with daytime driving, then you probably don't have to
    worry about finding a ride.
    
    Regards,
    
    Laura
    

    Well I made the start, I got the ball rolling. I called my agency
    that I was placed through, and asked them without trvling long
    distance,as they are in a different state than I, is there any way
    I could access my adoption file?
     After a series of question: Do I plan to search, can I come to
    their agency, is it possiable to have me work through an agency
    in my area that they can release the info to. Stating the reason,
    due to their state law they can't release any indintifing info to
    an adoptee.
      They refered me to agency within 1/2 hour ride of my town, 
    I called this agency explained what I'd like to do, cold they help.
    Phyllis said she'd check and get back to me. Well I got the call
    and told me they could help, and what did I need from them.
    I told Phyllis I was sending a letter of authorization to release any
    and all info my agency might have  and send it to her, and my agency
    needs confirmation that I am working with them.
      well the lettes are in todays mail. And now comes the time I must
    >TRY< to wait until the results are in and I get the call from the
    helping agency. There I may learn wonderful things then again I
    may not. But either way not knowing is worse than knowing.
    
    Lise who is hoping for good or better.
    

    Good luck_:-)
    
    Mary

    re.149  
     
      I personally saw the mailman put the letters into his mailbag.
             
    I kinda got the feeling that I have started a jurney  that will
    change my personal world as I know it. Just a feeling.
      I can only hope that the laws in Mass are different than where
    the records are in my home state? and they send the whole file.
      Does anybody curently know of the Mass laws concerning adoption,
    I am afraid the agency will not tell me the WHOLE truth if you know
    what I mean.
    
    Lise

Hi it's Lise again! Boy alot is happening with the adoptions that I
    am involved with mine and my son's.
    
    I contacted my son's agency in Boston and asked how I could/would
    I send him a birthday card to his file. Joanne told me that anytime
    I wanted to update his file to add more info was permissable anytime.
    They (The agency) wouldn't tell the Adoptive family that I had update
    the file unless they asked first. 
      
      As for releasing any info, I ws told that for now in MA that if
    the child between the ages of 18-21 comes into his/her agency they
    can release any and all non-indentifing info, also telling him/her
    that if they come back at the age of 21 or over and fil out a release
    of info form, and keep it updated, and provided the other party
    has signed one can release all identifing information. They will
    not tell the child if the bio-parent has already filled one out
    or not.
      I am grateful to know that I can still send stuff in and still
    recieve all the non identifing info on the adoptive parents since
    when I was pregnant and going through the process I didn't maintain
    nor did I hear that much on my son's new family. It was comforting
    the treatment I recieved from this agency. 
      I did tell the social worker that I DID NOT want to make any contact
    with the family of any way.I didn't want upset or disturb anything
    in anyway and I didn't expect the agency to contct the family in
    any way.
    
    Lise

    >I was told that for now in MA that if
    >the child between the ages of 18-21 comes into his/her agency they
    >can release any and all non-indentifing info, also telling him/her
    >that if they come back at the age of 21 or over and fil out a release
    >of info form, and keep it updated, and provided the other party
    >has signed one can release all identifing information. They wil
    
    Where did you get this information? It would be helpful to have an
    official source, not hearsay when dealing with said agencies. 
    
    Third party agencies that do this sort of search are rather taxing on
    the wallet... 
    
    Gail

    I called the agency I went through with my son, Jewish family and
    childrens services 31 Chardon st. Boston, MA. Spoke to Joanne Camann,
    a social worker-not the one who handled my case-,
    
    I will try to type in what she said, as repeated in our conversation.
    
    Joanne said that the way the law stands now in Mass, if a child comes
    to the agency and they are between the age of 18and 21 they can
    release all non identifing info. Also they will tell this adoptee
    that if they come back at the age of 21 or older they can fill out
    a release of information form and provided the bio-mother or bio
    father has signed one they will release at this point all indentifing
    all information. Joanne said the agency will NOT tell the child
    if a release form is already in his/her file if they are undeerage
    when they come in. They want the decision to be theirs.
     She did not mention cost at this point.
    
    As for me going to the agency to get all the non identifing info
    on my sons adoptive parents, I must go for two visits, the first
    being "feeling it out". They want to see what I really want, If
    I want to update his file in anyway. ETc the second visit consisting
    of obtaining the information and going over it with the agency.
    The total cost for both visits are 70.00
    
    
    But all agencies are different, all states are different.
    
    Lise

    Thank you for that information, I think it will help others. I do not
    know what agency my parents went through. If I had a better
    relationship with them I might ask, then again I think even with a close
    family that question might cause some pain.
    
    The cost problem that I was elluding to was the $400.00 a third party
    agency that I was refered to requires to get me the information on my
    original birth certificate. Their payment structure is half upfront
    half upon completion, no matter how long that takes. I've had the
    application for a couple of months now, I think I may finally be a
    hundred dollars ahead this month so I might send it in (my SO has
    generously offered to split the cost with me). I've not been to worried
    about the time frame, afterall I've waited 25 years as it is, if I find
    out, I find out.  
    
    Gail
    

    It now approchaes my(?) son's birthdate anniversary. He'll be 8
    this year, boy I remember 8 years old is when I was beginning to
    question this and that and become aware of the vast world around
    me.
    
    Question: Does anybody else send birthday cards to their child's
    file?? incase someday the child does go to the agency?
    
    Lise

    I wanted to post this information for people contemplating a search and
    for future readers information.
    
I have recently begun a search for my birth parents. I am using a third 
party search agency The Adoption Connection in Peabody, MA. For the tidy 
sum of $400.00 they will produce the names of my birthparents (assuming both
names are available).

Last week I tracked down the agency that had handled my adoption. I received
their rules for searches and was quite surprised to find the following:
 
  "If the adult adoptee 21 and over wishes to meet his/her birthparents,
   this request will also be made in writing to the [adoption] specialist.
   The specialist will attempt to get in touch with the birthparents. This will
   be done carefully with full consideration for the privacy of the
   birthparents. If the birthparents can be found and wants to have contact with
   the adoptee the adoption specialist will ask the birthparents to make this
   request in writing. No identifying information will be released until the
   birthparents consent is at least 30 days old. If the birthparents refuses
   contact with the adoptee, the birthparent's right to privacy and anonymity 
   will be protected."

    I knew that the release of non identifying information was now
    available but I did not realize that the laws had changed as above.
    This helpful attitude seems quite different from days gone by when no one 
    could give out any information (for your own good of course) 

The hitch of course is that for them to do the search it would cost some $40.00
per hour. With no guarantee of results, you could pay $40.00 hour and find a
dead end. Assuming that a search will take more than 10 hours I will be paying
less money to the agency in Peabody.

I do, however, have to pay the $40.00 for the non identifying information in my
file. This information should include but not limited to :

- birthplace, time
- given first name
- circumstance surrounding adoption decision
- ethnicity and religion of birthparents
- medical/mental health history of birthparents and their families of origin
- educational/career background

Both agencies are offering councelling activities for the search process. A
$50.00 membership fee (inclusive in the $400.00) at the Adoption connection
entitles you to attend meetings (a token fee for those) and receive a
newsletter. Any councelling through the adoption agency is at the $40.00 per
hour fee. 
    
    Gail

    Gail,
      Which state were you adopted in, and through which agency??
    
    I know from phone calls and what I am trying to do in regards to
    my file concerning me and the file concerning my son, the agency
    which I was placed through in Rhode Island their laws are very strict!
    The  laws don't allow: 
    any agency to act as a go between
    any agency to contact either party in adoption even if the one
    party wants to leave a paper stating it is ok, the agency can not
    do this by law.                                               
    The agency can in no way unless a court order amends the law, (special
    cases only) release any identifing info.
    
    In essence I asked this question to the person who handles the dept
    of records and files,: If if birth mother came to you and said I
    want you to release any and all information to my daughter if she
    comes to this agency or another agency acts on her behalf you have
    two pieces of paper with notorized signatures could you then release
    any information? the agency said they couldn't because of the way
    the law the is ont eh books in R.I.
    
    Now in MA. if I keep a current signed paper to relase all info
    and my son when he is 21 signs a piece of paper to release all
    indentifinginfo, then the agency will relase info.
    When my son turns 18, he can get all non indentifing onfo and the
    agency will tell him of their relase of indetifiny information but
    will not tell him if I have signed one or not. they want my son
    to make up his mind on whether he wants to see if I have responded.
    They (the agency) want it to be his own decision.
                                                     
    I guess I have repeated what you have said in your note, and I wish
    to God I was placed through a a aency in Ma, wher ethe Bull isn't
    quite as thick as in RI. For those adopted in MA count your blessings!
    
    Lise K.

    re .158 
    
    That's terrible, and I'm sure it is the result of not looking at
    the laws as opposed to people's views.  
    
    It is mostly only adoptive parents who fear the outcome of such
    a reunion.  I have some good friends who have adopted two girls
    and are terrified that they will find out the truth.  The truth
    is hard to hide.  I think this attitude actually causes the rift
    when one comes.  I've been trying to convince my friends of this.
    
    A good story is that I had done the same with a close relative.
    Her son knew that he was adopted by her husband.  He knew she knew
    the father.  She was at first reluctant to answer, but his insistence
    finally forced her to capitulate.  The result:  he contacted his
    father.  They have had wonderful phone conversations.  His family
    has wanted to know for many years as well.  They are planning a
    meeting next summer.  BUT...in the first contact he made sure that
    his biological father was not his FATHER, the person who loved him
    and raised him and was there for him.  <tears time> Can you imagine
    how long his adoptive father cried for joy.  I know.  
    
    Oh, yes.  The adoptive father was so hurt by the mere request for
    information, that it was because of him that there was any significant
    reluctance.  Boy is he glad he did it now!
    
    Bud

    The agency that my adoption was handled through was Children's Aid &
    Family Service in Fitchburg, MA. I had to do a bit of research to find
    out that, but I had a head start because I knew that I was born in
    Fitchburg. 

    I was very surprised when I realized what the language in the "Post
    Adoption Services" memo was saying. Imagine Massachusetts being in the
    fore front of a human right issue. How lucky for me!

    re .159

    Are you implying that your friends have adopted children and they don't
    want to tell them they are adopted? Who are they kidding. It will take
    2 seconds for them to find out, the first time they go to city/town
    hall to get copies of their birth certificates (come driver license
    time) if it was like mine it's typed right on it *adoptive parents*.
    Not to mention the multitude of other lies surrounding this issue this
    is not a good thing for the parents to be doing, they need to talk to
    an adoption counselor!

    Gail

I have a riend who was adopted.  When he applied for a job requiring 
a security clearance, they told him to give it to him, he would have to 
sign a release allowing them to find his adoptive parents.  Can they
do this?  If they can, perhaps you ought to contact the people responsible
for security clearences.  (FBI?)  Or apply for a job with the NSA.  ;-)

As a side note: my brother was adopted, and my father saw his biological
mother's name "by accident"  (he says).  He has not told my brother the
name, nor even that he knows it, but he says if and when my brother asks, or
starts a search of his own, my father will tell him.  My brother is 15, and
had never mentioned a serious interest in finding his biological mother.

D!

    News of News...
    
    I just got a call from the agency that is acting as a go-between
    for me and the agency I was palced through.
    
    They just recieved my file and we have set up a date and time...
    They are going to tell me about my parents, grandparents, Great
    grandparents all materinal and all about my Paterinal grandparents
    and my father. There is no identifing info so the social worker
    is going to make me a copy if what was sent to her so I can have
    a copy. 
    
    P.S. I just found out Where I spent the first year my of life...
    at A FOSTER HOME AND THE PEOPLE THERE LOVED ME.... I GOT TEARS...
    I AM FINDING OUT ABOUT ME... THANXS FOR BEING HERE!!!!
    
    LISE KUHLMANN

    I'm happy for you.  Roots are important.  I have been digging at
    mine because I did not know much about myself beyond my immediate
    family.  I enjoy understanding about my roots.  
    
    But what are you going to do next?  Do you have a plan to go after
    the identifying information?  The people over  at VIXVAX::GENEALOGY
    have helped others with this, although that isn't the purpose of
    the conference.  (Just a lot of good people)
    
    Bud

    Great news, Lise! :^)
    
    grins,
    Marge

    I just bought the Time magazine issue for last week which had a long
    and thoughtful series on adoption. I'd recommend it for anyone
    on any side of the adoption triangle.
    
    Bonnie

    I myself am still wondering where to go next...
    
    As my appt. isn't until Oct 18 5:30pm I want to wait and hear the
    news. But Like I have already said to Phyllis, the go-between
    counselor, If there is any way the agency could deliver a letter
    for me without telling me of her address or name, then I am not
    breaking any laws am I? I could state in the letter my name and
    my address, explain what I want to do, waht I expect, Not Much,
    and leave her with the ball in her court. I know it would come as
     a shock to her, but if she is anything lik I am as a bio-mother
    who has put my child up for adoption, I would be thrilled to hear
    how that now adult is doing, I would not try to be another mom,
    as he/she has one but just a friend.
    
    Lise

	It's probably best to wait until you know the reason you were put
	up for adoption, but I would think it would be okay to write to her; 
	just make it very clear that if she doesn't want to see you, that's 
	okay.

	I can't imagine a birth mother objecting to getting the information 
	that her child was a healthy and happy adult.  Be aware, though, 
	that contact from you might bring up some very unpleasant memories 
	(say, of a bad relationship), which could cause a mixed reaction...

	Good luck,
	Beverly

    What I do know...
    
    1. I lived my 1st life in a foster home where I was happy, and loved.
    
    2. I am a illegimate child of a college fling.
    
    3. What can be worse/ not that being illegimate is immoral anymore!
    I've always knowen I was a illegimate child a product of a college
    fling, but over 28 3/4 years I have had time to accpet this, had
    I can honestly say I have no ill feelings towards anybody, things
    happen, I am grateful that she didn't try to have a back street
    abortion that might have ruined her life.
    
    Lise

>I am grateful that she didn't try to have a back street
>abortion that might have ruined her life.
 
    not to mention yours... 8^)

    Let's make "illegitimate" a word of the past. It seems absurd, not to
    mention demeaning as one definition of it is "incorrectly deduced,
    illogical"; "illegal". Children born to unwed mother's needn't be 
    subject to such concepts that they are illegal.

    Gail (waiting for word on her "roots")   

    Annual New Hampshire Adoption Conference sponsored by the Open Door
    Society of New Hampshire (a non-profit adoption information and 
    support group).
    
    Saturday, November 4, 1989
    1:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. (Registration at 12:30 p.m.)
    University of New Hampshire/Manchester Campus
    400 Commercial Street
    Manchester, New Hampshire
    
    Keynote address
    Representatives from adoption agencies licensed in New Hampshire
    workshops
    book table
    refreshments
    
    Cost:  $8.00 per person
           $15.00 per couple
    
    Early registration form available.
    
    
    (For further information, please call 603-434-9542

    Well I did it!!!! I went to the agency who was acting as the go
    between and received all my non-identifing info. Needless to say
    my bowling on my league after that was useless.
    
    I learned so much, but not enough, I learned intrests, likes, dislikes,
    hobbies, health, where my looks came from, where my height came
    from, I learned I have 3 aunts on my bio-mom's side and 2 aunts
    on my bio-dad's side. My bio-dad even contacted the agency in 1963
    to make sure I was placed in a good home (he had moved to the West
    during my bio-mom's pregnancy because she pulled away from him,
    being afraid of what her family would think of him.), but he supported
    the decision.
    	both of my bio's were 18. There is still so much I want to know,
    I was given the name of some agency's that search, and was told
    that the Adoption Connection has the best success rates.
    	Can anybody send help me on this? Does anybody know their policy?
    
    
    A very teary-eye, but grateful
    
    Lise

 re .171  Congrats on the information Lise, I think you and I are running
    neck & neck on our search...read on...

.152 >I contacted my son's agency in Boston and asked how I could/would
    >I send him a birthday card to his file. Joanne told me that anytime
    >I wanted to update his file to add more info was permissible anytime.

    I remember when I first read this I thought that putting a
    birthday card in your child's file was somewhat useless. Well, not
    today.

    I got a call yesterday from the agency that handled my adoption. About
    a month ago, at the direction of The Adoption Connection, I sent a
    request for non-identifying information. I had been following up on
    that letter earlier in the week. The adoption counselor, Ann, told me
    that she had been able to get to my request and had put the information
    in the mail to me. Unlike Lise, I did not feel a need to get the
    information in person. 

    Then she told me that when she opened my file there was a letter in it
    from my (birth) mother. In case I ever decided to search for her, she
    wanted to let me know that she is looking for me! Wow! My mother is
    looking for me! The letter was dated from 1979. It's been in there
    waiting for me for 10 years. I can only assume it was put in there on
    or about my 16th birthday, great present. 

    So anyway, Ann asked if I wanted her to try to contact her with the
    info that was in the letter (it included a phone number). And that is
    were I wait today. There is a chance she's moved or worse changed her
    mind. At least if she moved I would have only 10 years to track down and
    not the full 25/26 years.  
     
     The moral: send those letters to those files!
    
    Gail

    Congratulations Lise!!!  That is so neat!  You had mentioned in an
    earlier message that you had a feeling your life would take on a new
    prepective and it did!  You are learning sooo much about your life! I
    feel so very happy for you!  
    
    I am getting married next month and my finace is adopted.  He is 30
    years old and only knows that he was born in the Bronx, New York and
    "lived" somewhere until he went to his "home" when he was a little
    than a yr and a half old.  He's not sure of much, or how old he
    actually was, he only remembers being taken to his "new home" and given
    a piece of cheese (which he threw onto the kitchen floor)  heeee! 
    anyway, He has "heard" his name was Billy, but that's it.  He Biol.
    father died when Eddy was 15 years old and his mother is now 68.  It's
    obvious that his bio parents felt uncomfortable about talking about any
    details.  Eddy does wonder about his non-identifing info more than
    actually finding out names and so forth (at this point) Especially any
    medical and so forth.. since we will be married in November, that is
    important to him as well as me, in case we have a family of our own
    someday.  The medical background could prove vital.  I am new to this
    file and probally am asking a question that has already been discussed,
    though there is sooo much info in this file, I don't know where to
    start.  Eddy's brother and sister, were both adopted also and are 31 and
    32. (He's bio parents were unable to conceive).  Eddy is soo different
    than his adpt. brother and sister, which isn't all that uncommon in
    even bio families, but he sometimes wonders about oh soo much.  He had
    a wonderful life with his family, best of everything and so forth, but
    as so many of you, he does at times reach for something that he's not
    quite sure is "there".
    
    If anyone can inform as where I can tell Ed to start I would appreciate
    it... again he was born in the Bronx, N.Y. on 10/29/58 and has lived in
    Worcester since he was a apprx. (?) 1 and 1/2 or soo.
    
    THanks, 
    
    TS
    

    I noticed I made some typos in my reply #.173.  I referred to Ed's 
    adoptive parents as his bio parents by mistake.   He doesn't know
    anything about his bio parents.  and his adoptive father died when Ed
    was 15 and his adoptive mother is now 68.
    
    TS
    

    I am retyping 175 as the wording didn't appear to what I would like
    to have appeared.
    
    Have your faincee read his babybook carefully! I found mine contained
    the hospital I was born in. For me That is my next step in contacting
    the hospital and seing if it is better to go to R.I. or if they
    will send me my records but then again if I have no last name how
    are they to find my records. Was he born in a state where they require
    all sides to go through an agency i.e. MA, RI? 
                                        
    Is there anybody/relative that is willing to talk??? at least a
    little. Even though my Adoptive mom isn't open to the subject her
    mother-my grandmother was able to tell me few things.
    
    and from there I relly can't think of too many things.
    
    Yes I learned alot of things like I look like a little of everybody,
    I have my Bio-Momand Dad's hair and eyes but have the fairer
    complexationlike those of my Aunts on both sides. I have a really
    neat medical background for which I am grateful for there are alot
    of things that I am aware of that are of concern to me.
    
    And most of all I can pass these to my son whom I put up for adoption.
    
    Lise

    Thank you Lise,  
    
    He'll start with trying to find out which hospital in the Bronx NY he
    was born in. 
    
    TS

Well, a lot has been going on for members of this file.  I've been doing 
some business travelling and haven't been keeping up with notes.  There is 
so much to respond to...here goes...

Re: Lise Kuhlmann and her various notes...

I can really understand that, although you feel really good about receiving 
some non-identifying information, you still want more information.  You 
asked about The Adoption Connection.  I think they are great.  They are the 
organization that helped me do my search.  Contact Susan Darke.  She is 
wonderful.  I remember the first time I called her.  I was not connected 
with anyone and felt totally alone starting my search.  She was so warm and 
enthusiastic and really helped me get to a place where I could feel that I 
had *every* right to do the search.

Also, I concur with Gail about not using the word illegitimate.  There is 
no need to use words that infer that you are "less than" because you are an 
adoptee.  Every child is legitimate.


Re: Gail Koski...

Sounds like you are blasting right along in this process.  Please keep us 
posted as to your progress.  It's nice to know that your birth mother has 
been hoping that you would come looking for her!  Knowing that she placed 
this letter in your file means that you won't be such a shock to her when 
she receives your letter.  It is important to really know that our birth 
mothers have thought about us, have wondered about our well-being, and that 
they really do want us to find them!  I am so happy for you, Gail!


Re: D! Carroll

I don't know about security clearances and the FBI.  I do know that they 
are very thorough.  I have an uncle who is now a retired FBI agent, and I 
remember that they checked out the entire family before they accepted him 
into the agency.  I do think that it's enfuriating that the FBI can go and 
find out about your friend's birth family, but that your friend is denied 
access to this information.  The laws need to change.

As for your brother, perhaps he hasn't mentioned anything because he is 
worried that it might make your parents feel that he doesn't view them as 
his parents.  It all depends on how your parents have dealt with adoption 
and the messages he received, both spoken and unspoken.  Have you ever 
asked your brother if he wonders about his roots?  Or, perhaps if your 
father told your brother that he knew the name of his birth mother and that 
if he ever wanted to know this, just ask.  That would be giving your 
brother permission to talk about where he is at.  Just some thoughts.


re: TS Shepeluk

As for your fiance...if he is interested in doing a search, there is an 
organization in NYC that may be able to help him...

Adoption Circle
401 East 74th Street, Suite 17D
New York, NY 10021


For those who are a part of the adoption triad, I would suggest joining 
organizations such as Concerned United Birthparents (CUB) or The American 
Adoption Congress (AAC). 

Laura

     I'm meeting my bio-Mom tomorrow! She contacted me over the weekend,
    well, she got to know my answering machine very well, as I was not home
    all weekend. But I did call her back and we will be meeting tomorrow.
    She said her husband and 2 children are very anxious to meet me, but
    that will have to wait because I'll be out of state this weekend.

    I'm very excited about the instant family, a half sister and half
    brother, and that's just on bio-Moms side. Wow, I've never had blood
    relatives before.

    It's not even fair to call this a search, I didn't do a whole lot of
    looking! I hope this will encourage people who have not considered
    searching because they thought it would be a long drawn out process. I
    can related because a year or so ago I would not have even bothered.
    But with the loving support of my SO and the knowledge derived from 
    this notes file (thanks Laura!) I started the process this past August.
    It came together in the past month. I know my case is different because
    my bio-Mon was looking for me to, but imagine how many other adoptees
    have letter sitting in their file, just waiting to be discovered.
    
    Gail

    I think Laura's notes have done a world of good for all of us, whether
    involved directly in adoption or not.
    
    Gail, all the best with your new-found family!
    
    big grin,
    Marge

    >>I'm meeting my bio-Mom tomorrow!
    
    ******* WOW ******  ***** GREAT NEWS, GAIL!!!!!! *******
    
    I bet you are going to have a hard time sleeping tonight!  I remember
    when I went off to meet my aunt, I was so keyed up that I could barely
    stay focussed on anything...including my driving...and I had a 2 hour
    drive to Hartford, CT to meet her!
    
    >>I'm very excited about the instant family, a half sister and half
    >>brother, and that's just on bio-Moms side. Wow, I've never had blood
    >>relatives before.
    
    I really hope that you and your half-sibs will get along great and
    figure out how to be siblings even thought you are meeting as adults. 
    Finding my half-brother and sister was such a great gift for me.  Oh,
    enjoy them!  So now you have instantly become the older sister!
    
    I hope you are planning to bring some pictures, maybe some of yourself
    when you were growing up.  I'm sure your birth mom would really love to
    see that.  Also, bring a camera and take a few photos.  It is such a
    trip to have pictures to look at, to see faces looking back at you that
    resemble you!
    
    I hope you have a terrific meeting with your birth mom.  Also, bring
    tissues...from my experience I learned that there are many tears of joy
    at these events.  I will be sending you supportive energy tomorrow,
    Gail.  *Enjoy*
    
    Warm regards,
    
    Laura
    

    
     Congrads Gail!!!!
    
      I will pray that all goes well with everybody.  I am so happy
    for you!!!
    
    Lise K.

    That's great, Gail.  My nephew spends 3+ hours a week on the phone
    with his dad and half sibs.  They can't get enough of each other,
    and the need is growing.  (Three hours is a short talk week.)
    
    There's a message here though.  We need to work to get it out. 
    Biological parents who are at all interested in contact with their
    children, OR children who want to contact their parents should put
    that letter into the file!  Even if you are going to proceed with
    other channels, that letter might get the results faster (and it
    has the added advantage of insuring that the contact will be a pleasure
    for both.)
    
    Ideas?  How best to get the word out?
    
    Bud

    How would YOU handle this...??????????
    
    
     Since learning much of my history and I can pass this down to my
    son.. I want to contact his Bio dad's family and learn as much as
    possiable about them, intrests, medical,looks etc.
    
    
    
    
    
    Let me tell you a little about my son Taylor....
    
    He was born healthy...Thank God there were doubts.....
    his bio dad left me when he learned I was pregnant, denied the child
    was his. The agency had to dragged Bio dad into court to sign papers.
    Bio dad married someone else when I was 6 months pregnant.....no
    contact was ever made between us after we split up.
    
    
    
    Now the dilema that I am facing..........
    
     I would like to contact Taylor's paternal family and get some medical
    background, intrests things that I would like to pass onto Taylor.
    
    How do I contact the paterinal family... I have sincere doubts that
    they know of his (Taylor's) existence.
    
    can anyone offer supportive, decisions, for I realize that I am
    about to walk to very emotional, rocky grounds.
    
    Lise
    

Not to many adults get the opportunity to meet their parents for the first time
then again, I've known my parents all my life. Does this make sense? Not to me,
but that's how I felt meeting my bio-Mom. I met a perfect stranger who shares a
very common thread, heritage. 

In some ways I may have been expecting to meet a person who would be "instant
Mom" just add daughter. But there was no instant bonding to take place. I met a
nice hard working woman. If I'd met her socially we'd probably not hit it off
to well. I'm not sure we have very much in common, if you can say that about
someone you share your gene's with. Then again I don't have a lot in common
with my adoptive parents...

I'm glad we had a chance to meet. I learned a lot about my past, my new found
blood relatives and added a little bit to the picture of who I am. Surprisingly
I found out that I am one of the smaller people in the family (I'm 5'10"). My
bio-Mom didn't really look like me in the face, apparently I have my father's
nose. Structurally we were similar. I can see myself in her two children,
for the first time I saw pictures of people who had eyes and smiles like
myself. I felt good about that, having grown up with parents and a sister who
don't look anything like me, I can only imagine how children adopted into
families of a different race must feel!

Soon I'll be making plans to meet these step siblings as well as their father.
I have contact information for my bio-Father who lives in Maine. He has at
least children from his first marriage who would be older than me. The life
story that I heard about him wasn't to encouraging and I may just hold off for
a bit before contacting him. Apparently he was happy to hear the news that I
had "surfaced".

It's a lot of information to digest. I don't know what kind of relationship to
expect/want from my bio-Mom. I have so many things going on in my life and I am
not sure where to take this new "family". I guess I can just take it at a
pace I am comfortable and right now after the initial meeting I think that will
be slow.

End of report,

Gail

    I thought strongly about this topic last Sunday evening when I received
    a call from the daughter I put out for adoption 6 years ago.  She
    was 10 at the time.  She sounded unsure of my response when she
    asked, "Is this Barbara?  This is Yvonne--you know?  Your daughter?"
    as if I would have forgotten.  The last time I had heard of Yvonne,
    it was said that she had moved to an adoptive home in Seattle, and
    was supposedly quite happy, but the story I got from Yvonne was
    quite different.  After living with her third or fourth adoptive
    family, she was returned, yet again, to foster care.  She seems
    to have decided to take a crash course in reality and became cross
    addicted, pregnant and miscarried, and finally joined AA and has
    been sober for 18 months--all this and she's only 16!  She commented
    that she had finally realized why she had never been able to finish
    being adopted and said that it's because she never really wanted
    another mother but never knew it until she had "lost" me.  She shared
    her realization that money does not necessarily buy happiness, and
    that whereas I may not have been able to buy her what she wanted,
    I did the best I could and at least loved my kids.  She continued
    on and finally said, breaking into tears on the phone, "I guess
    I just want to tell you I'm sorry for the way I treated you and
    the things I did.  I also want to tell you I love you, Mom.  I can't
    believe that you're actually listening to me and talking to me!
     I've dreamed of this moment for so many years!  I somehow didn't
    think you would... We talked for quite awhile longer and I sensed
    a major change in Yvonne that went beyond her experiences.  I kept
    trying to remember what the adoptees in this file kept needing to
    hear from their birth parents, and tried to give Yvonne what she
    might need to go on with her life.  I told her that I love her too,
    and explained that while it was a very hard decision I had had to
    make, it was intended to be the best choice I had at the time. 
    She said that oddly enough, it was a good decision on my part and
    that she did need to learn the hard way and had done so.  I was
    so impressed by the things she said and shared that I asked her
    if she wanted to come home, and whether she could or not.  Yvonne
    again cried and commented that she had dreamed of me inviting her
    home and would call her social worker the next day.  The result
    of this amazing and rather intense event is that Yvonne may well
    "come home" for a week or so during Christmas.  I've been waiting
    for the social worker to call, but she has tentatively "okayed"
    Yvonne's request.  No one knows how this will work out, but any
    good thoughts and support you can ship our way during this time
    are appreciated.  With a lot of cooperation between everyone, it
    may be time for Yvonne to finally "come home."
    
    Thanks for listening!
    
    Barb

    Barb, this has been one heck of a year for you... all the best to you
    and Yvonne.  
    
    Marge

Barb,

I think that this is wonderful news.  And I'm sure it was a bit of a shock 
to pick up the phone and have your daughter at the other end.

    >>The last time I had heard of Yvonne,
    >>it was said that she had moved to an adoptive home in Seattle, and
    >>was supposedly quite happy, but the story I got from Yvonne was
    >>quite different.  After living with her third or fourth adoptive
    >>family, she was returned, yet again, to foster care.  

I hope this news of the failed adoptions hasn't hit you too hard.  Although 
failed adoptions aren't common, they do happen and the social service folks 
never get back in touch with the birth mother to see if her circumstances 
have changed and if she's feeling able to care for her child.  They seem to 
think the child will be better being bounced from foster home to foster 
home or worse.

    >>She seems
    >>to have decided to take a crash course in reality and became cross
    >>addicted, pregnant and miscarried, and finally joined AA and has
    >>been sober for 18 months--all this and she's only 16!  

I'm glad to hear that she's in AA.  I've been sober for nearly 8 years and 
am seeing "kids" literally coming into the program.  So, good for her that 
she's learning how to turn her life around!

    >>She continued
    >>on and finally said, breaking into tears on the phone, "I guess
    >>I just want to tell you I'm sorry for the way I treated you and
    >>the things I did.  I also want to tell you I love you, Mom.  


    >>I kept
    >>trying to remember what the adoptees in this file kept needing to
    >>hear from their birth parents, and tried to give Yvonne what she
    >>might need to go on with her life.  I told her that I love her too,
    >>and explained that while it was a very hard decision I had had to
    >>make, it was intended to be the best choice I had at the time. 

It sounds like there are many possibilities for the healing to 
begin/continue.  

    
    >>No one knows how this will work out, but any
    >>good thoughts and support you can ship our way during this time
    >>are appreciated.  With a lot of cooperation between everyone, it
    >>may be time for Yvonne to finally "come home."
    
Well, the only way to take this is one day at a time (a concept that 
hopefully Yvonne is learning about in AA!), and really, that's all any of 
us have to work with.  I am really excited for you, Barb, and for your 
daughter and about the possibilities for both of your futures.  Please keep 
us posted, and if you would like to talk off-line, feel free to call me at 
276-8470 or e-mail TOP40::ERVIN.

What a wonderful story!

Hugs,

Laura

I would like to give a little update to the saga of my post-reunion 
experiences.  For those of you who have been following this note string, 
you know that when I did my search 4 years ago I did not tell my adoptive 
parents about it.  I have, I think, written about some of the reasons why I 
made the decision to remain silent about my search.

Lately I had been feeling very conflicted about continuing to withhold 
this information from my parents and had been thinking about ways in which 
to initiate a conversation with them (or with my mother, for starters).  

When I went to my parents house at Thanksgiving, my mother and I were 
having a talk about my older sister and I was asking my mother for 
information about my sister's general health at the time of her adoption.  
I had vague memories of a similar conversation which left me with the 
impression that my sister had been a failure to thrive infant and that she 
was not in good shape by the time my parents got her (age 6 months).  My 
recent conversation with my mother confirmed this impression since, at 6 
months old, my sister was refusing food.

This conversation led my mother to initiate the question to me, "so, did 
you ever complete your search?"  I found the question quite puzzling 
because I didn't understand her frame of reference about my "completing a 
search."  So I asked her what she meant.  Years ago, when I was still 
drinking, I attempted to get information out of the probate court in W. 
Springfield.  I guess I must have told her about that experience, but have 
no recollection of ever having told her.  So she said that she knew I was 
very curious and that given who I am she figured that at some point I would 
finish what I had started.  So I took the opportunity and said, "yes, I 
have finished my search."

My mother asked me how it felt to meet my birth mother.  I told her that my 
birth mother was dead and that she had died long before I ever did my 
search.  I told her that she was 38 years old when she died (meaning that I 
was 16 years old at the time) and that she died from alcoholism.  I could 
see that the news hit my mother very hard, and that there were two tracks 
running for her.  On one level, I could see how hard it was for her to know 
that the woman who gave me life was now dead, and on another level I could 
sense my mother's relief about not having to deal with the implications of 
"sharing" me with my birth mother.  I was deeply touched by what I saw and 
felt in my mother.

She asked me how it felt to learn that my birth mother was dead.  I talked 
briefly about my feelings.

We then talked about search in general, and she offered her feelings and 
opinions about the issue of search.  She very candidly told me that if some 
one had come knocking on her door when I was still a kid she would have had 
the urge to kill, but that she felt that it was perfectly reasonable for 
adult adoptees to want to know about their origins, etc.  I was really 
touched and agreed with her about adoptees need to bond with their adoptive 
families and that I didn't think that birth parents should interfere with 
that while the child is growing up.  She mentioned that she has seen some 
shows on t.v. that have dealt with search and reunion.  Clearly she has 
watched them carefully because she has all the "vocabulary" associated with 
search.  "Reunion", "birth mother/father/parents", etc., were words that 
were coming from her with a very familiar tone. 

I could see that she was pacing herself during this conversation, asking 
for information and taking it in at a rate that felt comfortable for her.  
My mother did not ask me my birth mother's name.  She was also under the 
impression that because my birth mother is dead that that is somewhat the 
"end of the story" or search.  I don't think that she is at a place yet 
where search and reunion includes the extended family.  She did not ask if 
I had siblings or half-sibs, she did not ask about aunts or uncles, she did 
not ask about my birth father.  But I also see that the not asking about 
extended family is part of the pacing, part of the progression through 
integrating all the information in the reunion process.  When I was in the 
throes of my search, all I could really focus on was finding my birth 
mother.  The concept of siblings or extended family was a fleeting one, at 
best.

I will be going to my parents house this weekend, and my mother wants us to 
talk some more, this time with my father as a participant (he was out doing 
errands when the issue came up at Thanksgiving). 

I feel that I was given a very special gift this Thanksgiving, a gift that 
makes me mindful of the gratitude I feel for the abundance of caring and 
loving people that I have in my life.  I am really looking forward to 
continuing the dialog with my parents and feel open to discussing whatever 
they feel ready to discuss.

I also feel very much at peace now with the initial decision I made to wait 
on telling them about the search.  Part of me always believed that when 
they were ready to hear "yes" for an answer they would be the ones to ask the 
question about search, that they had taken the time to think about what 
search and reunion would mean for them, and how they might feel about it.  
I feel that my mother's initiation of the discussion with her question to 
me, "have you finished your search," is an affirmation that I did the right 
and loving thing with them.  I did my search only when I was ready to move 
forward with it.  They are now asking me about it with, I believe, the same 
level of readiness.
    
    Laura_who_is_now_debating_about_whether_or_not_to_bring_reunion_pictures

    How wonderful for you, Barb! I hope everything works out.
    
     The Doctah

    Linda Cannon Burgess who is a social worker and who spent many years
    doing family assessments and adoption placements has written another
    book entitled: Adoption: How It Works.
    
    In her new book Linda provides follow-up to the adoption placements
    she made many years ago and deals with issues regarding birth parents,
    adoptees need to search and the impact of search on adoptive parents.
    
    Adoption: How It Works can be ordered directly from the author at:
    
    Burgess Books
    109 Irving Street
    Cambridge, MA 02138
    Cost: $9.00 (which includes postage)
    
    Linda's first book The Art of Adoption is still in print as far as I
    know and is a great resource book in terms of thinking about adoption,
    dealing with infertility, etc.
    

    This is being posted anonymously for a member of the noting community.
    
                       ***********************
    
    I'm a birthmother who has been reading the notes on adoption.  What 
follows are my reactions to several issues.  I'm asking Laura to submit this
for me so I can remain anonymous. 
********
   The comment that the adopted child did not wish to search for birthparents 
was made a few times.   This may well be the case and the adoptees wishes should
be honored.  The desire to search seems to be based on several factors
including level of general curiosity, level of fear of rejection, and level of
confidence in acceptance by the adoptive family.  The more secure the child
feels, the more curious the nature, the less fear of rejection, the more
likely the search.
   Let me recommend some acts of kindness which the adoptive parents can take
in any case.  First, try to remember how you felt about your child 
after you held him/her for the first few minutes; how you felt looking at
the child and feeling a small body in your arms.  Could you walk away and 
forget and not care if that child were alive or dead?  From my own experience,
don't expect the birthmother to be any more coldhearted than you would have
been, odds are enormous that she was only more desperate.  If you could
possibly leave a message at the agency, which could be provided if the birth 
mother inquired, it would reassure her that the person she birthed is alive and
not abused.  It would show a wonderful consideration for one of the people 
who provided your child's genetic ancestry.
   Also, if your child has health problems, could you leave that information 
at the agency as well.  Women who have placed children for adoption have had 
later children who died because of some inherited condition which they would 
have prepared for had they known.
   Another act of kindness would be to release the child's first name.  We name
our babies and send out good wishes and prayers for them who were given to 
those people who are better than we are - who deserved them when we didn't.  
We don't even know the right name to pray for, hope for - that hurts.  Granted 
you are their mothers, but so are we.
********
   Somewhere there is a statement to the affect, that nowadays women who would
formerly be "unwed mothers" can keep their children.  That's true, but...
Since I WAS an unwed mother, I've done volunteer work tutoring "young single 
parents."  The stigma attached to these women, the lack of resources (things 
like transportation for sick children) is ENORMOUS, also the pressure on them
to relinquish their children is still huge.  A lot of people, certain lawyers
especially, make a lot of money off of adoptions.  I was glad to see the
warning about adopting children from foreign countries.  If your interest is
the welfare of foreign children rather than satisfying a need of your own, 
there are reputable agencies which work for the general welfare of children.  
Again often undue pressure is placed on the poor to relinguish children who 
can be bought by wealthy Americans.
*****
   Anyone who adopts is adopting a human being.  This is not the adoptive
parents' child.   This is not the birthmother's child.  This is the child's 
child.  The child belongs to him or herself - is NOBODY's possession.  The 
concern should be for that person's welfare.  That person will at some point 
be a teenager - a budding personality who tries on a variety of styles.  Humans
only start as babies and need to grow through many phases with all the joy and 
conflict that life brings.
*****
    I know CUB has been mentioned in the notes.  I know that I'm not the
only birthmother at DEC.  CUB has been an enormous source of emotional
support to me.  So if you'd like to reach them, here's the information:
CUB - Concerned Unit Birthparents, INc., is an international, non-profit,
support and self-help group for parents separated from their children, as well
as adoptees, adoptive parents, and other adoption affected persons.   The New
England region meets the 4th Sunday of each month, September through June at 2
P.M. at the Atlantic Community Center, 12 Hunt St., North Quincy, MA.   For
More information call 617-328-3005.
*****
   Finally one thing that cuts me deeply is hearing people say "I know
for myself that I could never give up a baby."  Watch your words.  I would have
said that at one point, but when faced with the alternatives I had, I had to
do it.  Remember the story of Solomon - the true mother would rather lose her 
child than have the child torn apart.  Sometimes the choices are about that 
good and you do things that you never get over.

    .191's mention of leaving a message for the birth mother reminded
    me -- 
    
    One thing that's been bothering me lately is wondering whether
    Kat's father would be able to find her if he had a change of heart
    and decided he wanted to get to know the child he abandonded
    before her birth. 
    
    I haven't worried about it up until now because my parents are
    still living at the same address where I used to live, at the same
    phone number, and finding where we are would be as simple as
    picking up the phone.  But soon they're going to be retiring and
    moving, and the trail will be gone. 
    
    There isn't an agency involved to leave a message at.
    
    I don't know where he is any more, so I can't send him any
    message; besides, I don't care to initiate direct contact with him
    both for myself and because I don't know what kind of life he has
    now or what kind of disruption it would cause. 
    
    Any ideas?
    
    --bonnie

Bonnie,

Unless you have been deliberately hiding your trail, it shouldn't be hard to
find you if he was willing to put some effort into it.

F'rinstance, if he knew you in high school/college (or knows what HS/college
you went to) he can contact them.  You could notify them of your new address.
(Schools like to know where their alumni are anyway...colleges for donations
purposes, HS's for reunion notices.)

Did you have any friends in common?  Make sure all the people you still
retain any contact with at all know where you can be reached.  Same goes for
any churches or other organizations you are in.

That's all I can think of right now, but I have heard that it doesn't take much
to track down someone who wasn't deliberately hiding their trail, if you knew
enough about their life before they "disappeared".

D!

    Thanks, D!, I hadn't thought of notifying the college we went to.
    I keep my address up to date at the colleges where I got my
    degrees, but I had kinda forgotten about the other one since I
    didn't graduate from there. 
    
    For various reasons I had not been keeping in touch with anyone
    from "back home" except my family -- I don't have any friends from
    high school and only one from that session of college, and
    I know she didn't know Mark.  
    
    --bonnie

I have just set up a closed notes file (member only) for people who are part 
of the adoption triad.  I have decided to start this notes file because I 
have received several requests from people who are not comfortable noting on 
this subject in an open notes file, for example, this notes string 

If you are interested in membership in this closed file please let me know 
and I will register you as a member of the conference and send you further 
information as to the location of the conference.

If you know of anyone who would be interested in membership in this 
conference, please pass the information on.   The purpose of this 
conference is not to educate the general population about adoption, but 
rather to provide a safe forum where triad members can discuss issues and 
find support.  Requests for access to the file can be sent to me at 
SONATA::ERVIN, TOP40::ERVIN or AMFM::ERVIN.  

If you have any questions about the file, please contact me.

Regards,

Laura (who is an adoptee)
                                             

    Thanks, Laura!
    
    Already, some of us are networking because of this new file!
    
    	Pennie

    Please don't abandon the rest of us completely, though!  I'm not a
    member of the adoption triad and thus won't seek membership in the
    closed file.  But I have been eagerly reading and learning from this
    and related strings.  Could a moderator of the new, closed file take it
    as a responsibility to cross-post (with permission and/or anonymity, of
    course) any educational-type discussions that would be of interest to
    the rest of us?
    
    I'd hate to lose this experience, though I understand and respect the
    needs of those who seek a more private venue.
    
    Respectfully,
    Karen

    Good idea, Karen.  I really appreciate the respect and consideration
    you have given to the people who have been asking for a closed notes in
    which they can discuss some painful, turbulent, whatever issues.
    
    I will try to keep up with this and cross-post when I am given
    permission from the author.
    
    Laura
    

    
    There is a note in the closed adoption notes file that is dealing with
    the issue of what happens when an adoption agency or state social
    service agency withholds information about the mental or physical
    condition of the child being adopted.  This article was posted in the closed
    file.     
    
    
         When Adoption Doesn't Work by Daniel Golden

Reprinted without permission from the Boston Globe Sunday Magazine, June 
11, 1989.


For years after Sheila was born in 1968, Bob and Joan Gordon wanted another 
child, but the timing never seemed right.  Even with two incomes -- he was 
a mechanic, she a lab technician -- they barely scraped by.  They couldn't 
afford for Joan to take a maternity leave, never mind paying for day care.

By 1981, their hopes for a second baby had receded into the realm of 
daydreams.  The Joan heard that Rhode Island, like other states, was 
offering older children for adoption.  Here, she thought, was a practical 
alternative.  She would not have to quit her job, and Sheila's longing for 
a younger sister might be fulfilled at last.

The Gordons, whose names have been changed in this story to protect their 
privacy, were very specific when social workers from the Rhode Island 
Department of Children and Their Families visited their suburban home.  
They wanted a girl between the ages of 6 and 10 who would be in school 
while they worked.  She could have a physical disability, they said, but 
not an emotional one.  The Gordons know their limits: A troubled girl would 
need more care than they felt ready to give.

The social workers pressed the Gordons to take two sisters, but they held 
firm.  One child was enough.  Finally it came down to a choice between one 
girl with a family history of blindness and another with diabetes.

The Gordons were introduced to the diabetic girl over lunch at a fast-food 
restaurant.  "I had a few doubts," Sheila says.  "But I ignored them.  I 
didn't know if I'd get another chance."

When Joan say blond, blue-eyed Lisa, the hard-headed attitude she had 
maintained throughout the adoption process yielded to her heart.  
"Something instinctively told me to go with this child," she says.  "Her 
background was so traumatic.  You wanted to just reach out and love this 
little girl."

Only 6 years old, Lisa had suffered a lifetime's worth of pain and 
separation.  She never knew her father, and her mother abused her.  Covered 
with bites and bruises, she was placed in a foster home.  She was adored 
there, but her stay ended abruptly when her foster father died of a heart 
attack.  She was removed from her next foster home after the family accused 
her of killing its cat and trying to smother a baby.  She was then sent to 
a state-supervised group home.  Along the way, she lost contact with her 
older brother and sister, who had been adopted.

Lisa's social worker assured the Gordons that Lisa had emerged from these 
unheavals emotionally intact.  Admittedly, she was immature, but nothing 
else could be expected, given her history.  "We were led to believe that 
once she was part of a good, secure home, she would be fine, and her 
problems would disappear," Joan says.  Assuming they had been told all, the 
Gordons never asked to read Lisa's file.

About to switch jobs, the social worker hurried to place Lisa.  After four 
short visits to the Gordons', where she rode the bike they had ready for 
her and played in the room they had furnished with toys and stuffed 
animals, Lisa was told one night at the group home that she was leaving the 
next day.  Although she had lived at the group home for a year, she wasn't 
given a chance to say goodbye to her friends.  When the social worker drove 
her to her new home on a June morning in 1982, Lisa had a fit of hysterics.

The Gordons soon began to realize that Lisa was a bigger challenge to their 
parenting skills than Sheila had ever been.  The early incidents revolved 
around Lisa's diabetes.  She knew she was not allowed to have sugar, but 
she craved it.  Although she was supposed to urinate into a cup so that the 
Gordons could measure her sugar count with a dipstick, she sometimes 
sneaked candy and then sabotaged the test by substituting water for urine.  
When the Gordons reminded her of the importance of staying on her diet, she 
agreed, but her behavior did not improve.

Lisa was placed in a special-education class in school, but she complained 
that the boys in her class were picking on her.  Because she seemed to get 
along better with younger children, she was switched to a mainstream class 
two years below her age level.  Soon, though, desserts were missing from 
her classmates' lunch boxes.  Then their lunch money began disappearing, 
too.  One child brought in a pin for his teacher, only to lose it.  It 
turned out that Lisa had stolen the pin and given it to her teacher.

"I was having a hard time," Joan Gordon says,  "I thought if a child moves 
into your house, you'd automatically fall in love with her.  I found out 
that wasn't the case.  She wouldn't let you get too close to her.  She'd 
crawl up in your lap and hug you, you'd get real close to her, and then 
she'd set off a bomb.  Irritating and loving, irritating and loving.  It 
would drive you crazy."

Still, the Gordons trusted Lisa's new social worker, who said that Lisa was 
undergoing normal transitional anxieties.  They went ahead with finalizing 
the adoption in February 1983, and Lisa was issued a new birth certificate 
-- standard procedure in adoptions.  To help her feel secure, Joan showed 
Lisa that her certificate had the same last name as Sheila's: The Gordons 
had two daughters now.  At that proud moment, none of them anticipated that 
the emotional scars within this usually friendly, happy-go-lucky child 
would devastate the family, and that her adoption would become the first 
one ever reversed in the state of Rhode Island.  Like so much in Lisa 
Gordon's life, her new surname was only temporary.

Adoption is supposed to last a lifetime.  Like marriage, it is meant to be 
an unswerving commitment, for better or for worse.

Yet, while adoption has a far higher success rate than marriage, it too is 
plagued by divorce.  Today, an increasing number of adoptive parents are 
relinquishing their children to the state, or even going to court to 
nullify the adoption.  Most of these "disruptions," as they are termed, 
involve adoptions of older children with physical or emotional problems 
stemming from abuse by their natural parents.  Infant adoptions are less 
prone to break up, although such disruptions are increasingly being 
recognized rather than swept under the carpet.  These disruptions not only 
traumatize the families involved, but they also drain state budgets because 
a disproportionate number of children from broken adoptions end up in group 
homes and residential treatment centers, with the state footing the bill.

Beset by lawsuits from disenchanted parents, adoption agencies are 
reassessing their credo that all children can be adopted.  "There is a 
split in the field," says Jeffrey Rosenberg, director of public policy for 
the National Committee for Adoption, an advocacy group in Washington.  
"Some people still say that there is no such thing as an unadoptable kid.  
Others, like myself, say that's unrealistic.  There are some kids who have 
been so abused that they'll never attach or bond.  It's so scary that 
they'll do whatever they can to prevent it."

The main reason for the surge in disruptions is a shift in the type of 
children being adopted.  Until the 1970s, only infants were considered 
adoptable.  Then an increase in abortions, coupled with greater social 
acceptance of single mothers, reduced the pool of available infants.  At 
the same time, the number of abused and neglected older children was on the 
rise.  Advocacy groups argued that these children, who were often 
warehoused in institutions or shunted from one foster home to another, 
needed adoptive homes.  In 1980, a federal law enshrined "permanency 
planning" as a goal for children in state care; the law also expanded 
subsidies for adoptive parents.  Like the deinstitutionalization of mental 
patients in the same era, this policy was both humanely intended and 
inexpensive, but it had the consequence of dumping some difficult people 
into a society that was not equipped to handle them.

The number of adoptions in the United States has steadily increased through 
the 1980s.  Excluding adoptions by stepparents, it is estimated that 60,000 
children will be adopted this year.  About 35,000 will be infants, while 
another 15,000 will be children age 3 or older.  (The other 10,000 are 
children adopted from overseas.)  Massachusetts families adopt about 500 
older children each year through the state Department of Social Services, 
and several hundred more through private agencies.  Foster parents make up 
half of all adoptive parents of older children.

Some infant adoptions do crumble as the children grow up.  No matter at 
what age it takes place, adoption is a delicate matter.  Sometimes adoptive 
parents cannot come to terms with their own infertility and create tensions 
by regarding their children as a consolation prize, second best to the 
biological child they can never have.  Or they go to the other extreme, 
acting as if their children were not adopted, repressing the children's 
curiosity about their biological parents.

"Adoptive children have a tougher time finding their identity," says 
Brookline District Court Judge Laurence Shubow, who has two adopted 
children.  "Who am I? Where do I come from? Am I just a frog waiting for a 
prince?"

But it is the adoptions of children age 3 or older that are most at risk.  
A recent study at the University of California at Berkeley found that one 
out of four adoptions of older children reaches the brink of disruption, 
and one out of 10 does rupture to the point where parents disown all 
responsibility for the children.

"It's a gamble for an older child to come into a family," says Richard 
Barth, a professor and co-author of the study.  "But when it pays off, it 
pays off for a lifetime.  Foster care ends at 18.  At least with adoption, 
you've got the 20s, 30s and 40s to patch it all together."

The more physically or emotionally disabled the child, the more likely is 
the adoption to fall apart.  For those children who are so damaged by abuse 
and rejection that they are unwilling or unable to bond with new families, 
adoption becomes just another way station on a shuttle that also stops at 
foster care and group homes -- and that, in the end, may leave them on the 
streets.  Some children are adopted twice or even three times.  That may 
still be preferable to living in an institution, but it's a far cry from 
the government's hope of permanency.

A 1986 study by the University fo Southern Maine found that 86 percent of 
older children involved in disruptions has been abused prior to being 
adopted.  The study concluded, "It is truly a system in which those who 
have suffered the most are the most likely to continue to suffer."

Many adoptive parents of older children bring a missionary fervor to a task 
that others might consider a drain of time and energy.  But some find 
themselves policing a child who does not share their commitment to the 
adoption, and who lies, steals, sets fires, or falsely alleges abuse -- 
just to escape the family.

If the adoption falls apart, it can mean for the child yet another 
rejection, another uprooting, another reason to be wary of family life.  
For the parents, hailed as saints by their friends and relatives at the 
time of the adoption, it can mean a pervasive sense of guilt.   Although 
they know that their child's troubles started long before the adoption, 
they are left wondering: Could we have done more? Could we have loved more?

"If you have a child biologically, you don't need anyone's approval," says 
Richard Casey, a clinical social worker who runs therapy groups in Newton 
for adoptive parents and adolescents.  "But if you adopt, you get the Good 
Housekeeping Seal of Approval.  That makes it harder to admit you've got 
trouble.  By the time the parents get to our group, they feel a lot of 
guilt."

That feeling of guilt nearly overwhelmed a Woburn social worker and her 
husband.  After they adopted an 8-year-old boy in 1981, he stole food and 
money, smeared feces on the bathroom walls, and stood by and watched while 
their biological sone was beaten in the school-yard.  The mother eventually 
developed a stress-related heart ailment.  In 1984, the couple asked the 
state to take custody fo their adopted son.  Since then, the mother has led 
several workshops for adoptive families in crisis.

"We tried like hell, but he just didn't want to be adopted," she says.  "If 
you can distance yourself enough and say, 'This kid is here, he's going to 
grow up here, and we're not going to be emotionally involved,' you can 
probably do it.  We aren't that kind of family."

"A lot of people stay in the commitment after it doesn't work out.  And to 
me, that's really unhealthy, because it affects the rest of the family.  
I've seen so many marriages break up over it.  All we were doing was talk, 
talk, talk about the boy's problems."

"We're guilty to a lot of our friends and relatives.  They say, 'How could 
you give your kid up?'  And a lot of people whon't give that kid up, no 
matter how unhappy they are.  I say to parents, 'Social workers and 
therapists will make you feel guilty.  But you have nothing to fee guilty 
about.  You did the best you could.'"

In those days when adoption was almost exclusively limited to infants, ti 
was considered a kind of rebirth.  On the grounds that it was best to start 
afresh, adoption agencies provided a minimum of information about infants 
to the new parents.  When one Massachusetts couple adopted a 5-week-old boy 
in 1970, they were told that he was part American Indian.  "Which tribe?" 
the new mother asked the adoption agency director.

"You're an intelligent woman," the director said.  "Pick a tribe."

As more older children began to to offered for adoption, many agencies 
withheld information about them, too, with damaging results.  Unaware of 
prior abuse, adoptive parents could not understand their children's 
promiscuity or violence.  Even if the parents eventually learned the truth, 
it was often too late; the family was beyond repair.

Nowadays, most adoption agencies say they share all information with their 
clients except for the names of the biological parents.  Several states, 
including Massachusetts, require agencies to be frank about the children's 
medical history, mental health history, and physical or emotional traumas.  
Both the "Wednesday's Child" segment on WBZ-TV and the "Sunday's Child" 
column in the Globe tell their audiences if children have been abused.

"We don't go on the air and put on soft music and show the kid running 
through flowers," says WBZ-TV news anchor man Jack Williams, who has helped 
to place 165 children in the past eight years.  (Not all of the adoptions 
have worked out: One child has been advertized three times and adopted 
twice.)  "We could generate thousands of calls.  But we don't do it that 
way.  The children I deal with have been in the system a long time.  The 
last thing they need is to have their hopes raised, spend six months with 
someone, and then be tossed out."

Nevertheless, many adoptive parents are denied key information.  More than 
half of the families that adopted sexually abused children in the Berkeley 
study did not know about the abuse before the children were placed with 
them.  The same was true of nearly one-third of the families that adopted 
physically abused children.  Families that discover problems only after 
placement, the study found, are more likely to fall apart.

In some of these cases, the full extent of abuse may never have been 
revealed.  In others, the child may have had so many foster homes and 
social workers that nobody knows the entire history.  But there are also 
occasions when social workers who feel pressured to place a child downplay 
the effects of abuse.

"Otherwise, the kid won't get adopted," says the Woburn social worker.  "I 
had a 3-year-old in my caseload who needed a psychiatric hospital.  You 
know how hard it is to find a psychiatric hospital for a 3-year-old?  It's 
a lot easier to find an adoptive parent."  Only the sensitivity she gained 
from the breakup with her own adoptive son kept her from offering the 
3-year-old for adoption.

Bitter at being left in the dark, parents are beginning to sue adoption 
agencies for unforeseen medical expenses and, in some cases, to seek 
reversals of adoptions.

A breakthrough case in this new legal genre of "wrongful adoption" involved 
a California couple who took a boy into their home as a foster child in 
1977 and adopted him in 1979, when he was 7.  Tom and Janice Colella ended 
up paying more than $55,000 for Tommy's psychiatric care after he killed 
his hamster and mutilated the ear of the family dog.

The Colellas sued the county adoption agency, contending that it never told 
them that Tommy, as a toddler, had abused animals, set fires, and been 
evicted from two foster homes.  In 1984, a judge granted the Colellas one 
of the first severances of an adoption in the United States, and they 
settled out of court three years later for $70,000 in damages.

An Ohio verdict also encouraged adoptive parents to seek redress.  In 1986, 
the Ohio Supreme Court sustained a $125,000 verdict for a couple that 
adopted an infant son in 1964 after a county agency assured them that he 
was a "nice, big health baby boy."  The agency's records, it turned out, 
revealed that the child showed signs of being retarded and had a high risk 
of disease.

Similar suits followed in other states.  Last year, seven Texas couples 
sued the state's Department of Human Services for access to its files on 
their children, whom they had adopted in the early 1980s.  They contended 
that the state's caseworkers had soft-pedaled the youngsters' histories of 
abuse in order to find them homes.  Although the case was widely 
publicized -- two parents described their children's sexual obsessions and 
homicidal tendencies on The Sally Jessy Raphael Show -- it was dismissed by 
a federal court on technical grounds.

In a suit pending in Maryland, Anthony and Dona Ricci want to rescind their 
1987 adoption of a 12-year-old girl.  They say they were never told about a 
1985 evaluation that found that she was depressed and angry at being 
rejected by her biological parents and several sets of foster parents.  
Although the report advised against adoption, the state matched her with 
the Riccis anyway, whereupon she broke household items and sent hate mail 
to her new parents.

Linda and John Murphy, of Abington, adopted a 5-year-old girl in 1975 after 
a social worker from the Massachusetts Executive Office of Human Services 
allegedly told them that Mary Beth's slight learning disability would be 
corrected in school.  It was not until 10 years had passed -- a decade in 
which Mary Beth proved to be severely mentally handicapped -- that the 
state provided records showing that her mother, brother, sister and 
grandmother were mentally handicapped.  Today, Mary Beth is 
institutionalized.

The Murphys are asking for $4.1 million in damages -- but not for a 
nullification of the adoption.  "You just don't do that," says Linda 
Murphy.  "We love her.  She's ours."

Once Lisa Gordon's adoption was finalized in 1983, the Department of 
Children and Their Families closed her case.  Soon afterward, Joan Gordon 
decided that her daughter needed psychotherapy, and she asked the 
department to pay for it.  Although such subsidies are often given to 
adoptive parents of emotionally distrubed children, Joan's request was 
rejected.  In the department's view, she was told, Lisa did not have 
emotional problems.

Whatever Lisa's problems were, they persisted.  Late in 1984, Joan finally 
obtained medical insurance that covered therapy, and the family began 
seeing a psychologist.  Instead of helping, Joan says, "the therapy was a 
catalyst for her to get worse."

When Lisa misbehaved, the Gordons made her do household chores.  The task 
she hated most was fetching wood from the woodpile in the back yard.  One 
afternoon, when her parents were away and Sheila was upstairs, Lisa took 
some matches from the cellar, pushed some dry leaves against the woodpile, 
and set it on fire.  The flames leaped to a nearby stockade fence.   As the 
blaze raged out of control, Lisa screamed for her sister.  Only quick work 
by the neighbors, who came running with hoses, saved the house.

When the Gordons rushed home, Lisa denied starting the fire.  Finally, at 
the therapist's suggestion, Joan told Lisa taht she was scared.  "If you 
didn't set it, someone is out there trying to burn the house down," Joan 
said.  The tactic worked: Without any sign of remorse, Lisa said she had 
wanted to get rid of the woodpile.

By 1985, the Gordons' house simmered with antagonism.  Sensing the tension, 
Sheila's friends stopped coming over.  One episode symbolized Lisa's 
increasing isolation from her parents and sister: Suspecting her of 
stealing gum at the grocery store, Joan and Sheila responded to Lisa's 
denials by following her into the bathroom and wrestling her to the floor.
They found the gum in her waistban, but the last elusive sense of family 
seemed to have been lost.  "I absolutely couldn't stand her," Sheila says.  
"I couldn't stand being in the same room with her.  She did everything she 
could to get me mad at her."

Holidays were always hard for Lisa, because she felt excluded from the 
warmth and intimacy of family celebrations.  Her next rebellion came just 
before Christmas, and it was precipitated by a mink coat.  The coat 
belonged to Joan's mother, who let Joan and Sheila wear it to Christmas 
parties.  Lisa wanted to borrow it, too, but her parents thought she was 
too young.

The the principal of Lisa's schoool called Joan at work one day.  A teacher 
had spotted Lisa carrying a mink coat over her arm.  "Does Lisa have a 
mink?" the principal asked.

Joan called Sheila at home.  The coat was not hanging in the closet.  So 
she instructed Sheila to watch for the mink when Lisa got off the school 
bus.  Sheila did as she was told, and reported back that the mink was 
nowhere to be seen. 

After her mother had interrogated her for the better part of two hours, 
Lisa admitted that she had worn the mink to school -- and left it in a 
rolled-up ball under her bus seat.  A polic officer retrieved the coat and 
brought it to the Gordons' house,  At Bob Gordon's request, the officer 
reprimanded Lisa, trying to put the fear of God in her.

Bob's relationship with Lisa was, by turns, more antagonistic and more 
affectionate that Joan's.  Lisa could goad her father into angry outbursts 
one minute and cuddle up to him the next.  So Joan was not surprised one 
morning in April 1986 when Lisa said that she wanted to do something nice 
for her father.  She volunteered to fix the soup that Bob, as was his 
custom, would take to work.  When Lisa gave him the thermos on his way out 
the door, he opened the lid and smelled something unusual.  It was the 
disinfectant Lysol, which is poisonous to ingest.  As usual, Lisa took her 
time before admitting she had filled the thermos with Lysol the night 
before while she was doing the dishes.  "I wanted to ruin his lunch," she 
said.

Outraged, Joan called the state and asked for Lisa to be taken away.  Told 
she would have to file criminal charges against Lisa first, she relented.  
"I thought, 'I don't want to give this child a record.  God, that's 
awful,'" she says.

It took one more incident for Joan to make up her mind.  Lisa came home 
from school one day bruised from a fall in gym class.  That night, the 
sugar count in her urine was sky-high, and Bob spanked her.  The next 
morning, Lisa showed her bruises to the school nurse and said that her 
father had hit her with a board.  Obeying the law, the nurse reported the 
allegation to the state.  After an investigation, the charges were dropped, 
and Joan went to the office of the state Department of Children and Their 
Families, saying she wouldn't leave until Lisa was removed from her house.  
State officials gave in and arranged for Lisa to be evaluated at Bradley 
Hospital, a pyschiatric facility for children in Rhode Island.

Three members of the hospital's staff listened to Lisa describe the Lysol 
episode in a passionless monotone.  Once of them asked, "Did you want to 
kill him?"  She said, simply, "Yes."  She was admitted to the hospital 
immediately.

Debbie has to be coaxed to tell her story.  The 18-year-old is wearing a 
jean jacket and a blue baseball cap turned backwards, catcher-style.  She 
has curly brown hair and large eyes with a trace of impudence in their 
stare.  "You'll all laugh," she says.  "It's funny.  My father knocked all 
my teeth out with a hammer."

She was beaten again in a foster home, she says, before being adopted.  "My 
parents felt sorry for me, so they adopted me.  My father was Mr. 
High-and_mighty.  He expected me to be the perfect child, and I couldn't 
be.  My parents used to say, 'This is your real family.' I said, 'No, 
you're not.'"

Hospitalized after attempting suicide, she lied to a nurse that her 
adoptive father had abused her.  "It was because I didn't want to live at 
home," she says.  "The other kids told me that was the way to get out."  
Back home, she attacked her mother with a knife.

Perhaps compensating for his lisp, George acts macho.  Leaning back in his 
chair, his feet on the table, he delivers a gruff, obscenity-laden 
autobiography.  He bounced from one foster home to another until he was 
featured on Boston television.  Two social workers adopted him, but 
fighting landed him in a juvenile detention center two years later.

"I love them," he says.  "Sometimes shit doesn't work out.  I'm glad they 
love me and they care about me.  They wanted me to be like their daughter 
and son.  They were all famous in high school."

Leslie's hand is up.  Polite and articulate, she's eager for attention.  An 
Air Force officer adopted her when she was 8 years old, but she never felt 
part of the family.  Four years later, she reentered foster care.  "It was 
hard to stay with one family for a long time," she says.  "I was old enough 
to know they weren't my parents.  They didn't like the people I was hanging 
around with."

"Both of my parents were adopted, and they were just trying to do a good 
deed," continues Leslie, who is 16.  "I don't think I'd go back there.  I 
don't want to be adopted.  I want to be my own person and make my own 
decisions."

Debbie, George and Leslie attend the Harbor Schools, a Newburyport-based 
residential treatment center for emotionally disturbed and behaviorally 
troubled adolescents.  Refugees from broken adoptions make up nearly 10 
percent of the Harbor Schools' population.  Tuition is $49,000 a year, paid 
primarily by the state Department of Social Services.  Most children spend 
about 18 months there; if they progress, they move on to less restrictive 
environments, such as group homes.

Since less than 2 percent of Americans are adopted, the proportion of 
adopted teenagers at the Harbor Schools seems startlingly high.  But, in 
fact, it is low compared with other treatment programs.  Last year, 21 
adopted children and adolescents entered Belmont's McLean Hospital, a 
psychiatric facility; they represented 15 percent of all admissions to the 
child and adolescent unit.  National studies show that adopted people make 
up 10 to 15 percent of mental health inpatients, 5 percent of mental health 
outpatients, and 6 to 9 percent of children classified for special 
education as emotionally disturbed, perceptually impaired, or 
neurologically impaired.  Up to 70 percent of these people were adopted as 
older children.

Clearly, most of these teenagers do not need psychiatric help because they 
were adopted.  Their troubles stem primarily from the abuse or abandonment 
they suffered prior to adoption.  But the overrepresentation of adopted 
adolescents in mental health settings does suggest that adoption was not 
what they needed.  By placing these disturbed children with adoptive 
parents without providing enough support, society delayed their access to 
treatment and perhaps lost the chance to cure them.  As so often happens, 
the government temporarily avoided picking up the tab -- only to pay a 
bigger bill later.

No one can predict for certain whether an adoption will endure.  But 
studies show that adoptions self-destruct most often when children with 
backgrounds of severe abuse and multiple foster placements are matched with 
educated parents with high expectations and high-achieving biological 
children.

That profile fits several teen-agers at the Harbor Schools.  As they chat 
at the schools' headquarters, they express stronger feelings for their 
biological parents and siblings than for their adoptive families.

Of the many adults she has lived with, Brenda can no longer remember which 
were her foster parents and which ones adopted her.  But she's still bitter 
at the state for separating her from her biological brother.  "A lot of 
people like being with their regular parents, even though they know the 
people who adopted them are trying to be nice," she says softly, between 
coughs.  "My life's over.  My whole family's gone."

After two years in Harbor Schools, Debbie is returning to her adoptive 
family.  But she remains ambivalent.  Asked if she's happy to go home, she 
says, "Sort.  I can see my dogs."

Later she adds, "I don't like getting attached to places, because then I'd 
have to leave."

Rueful laughter and voices quivering with unwept tears emanate one Monday 
evening from the basement of the Newton office of the state Department of 
Social Services, where seven adoptive parents are trading war stories.  
They include three couples, along with one woman whose husband refused to 
come because he doesn't like support groups.  In turn, they describe the 
latest episodes in their daily soap operas -- their daughter is dropping 
out of school, their son is in limbo between a residential treatment 
program that expelled him because he's psychotic and a psychiatric hospital 
that insists he's sane -- as the rest of the group advises and sympathizes.

"It's terrible," confides one mother, who adopted her son as an infant, 
only to watch him grow up into a juvenile delinquent.  "Every single day, 
you wait for something to happen.  When the phone rings, is it the police?  
You're in a state of mental chaos.  You cherish the good times, because 
they're few and far between."

One couple can report some progress.  They had eight adoptive children and 
all of them turned out fine except one daugher.  At 14, she announced that 
she would no longer obey their rules.  She placed herself in more and more 
dangerous situations until she was robbed in Roxbury at midnight.  Her 
parents then enrolled her in a treatment program.  Discharged three years 
later, she refused to come home.  She stayed with friends and slept in 
abandoned cars.

Now she's drifted to North Carolina, out of school and out of a job.  But 
she's back in contact with her adoptive parents.  "I've had 35 hours of 
phone calls with her from North Carolina this week," her mother says.  "We 
feel we're the only connection with reality she has at this moment.  
Ultimately, she knows we love her, and that's why she keeps reconnecting."

Only the group, the couple say, helped them to cope with their daughter.  
Without its support, they would have continued the cycle of kicking her out 
and taking her back until the whole family was devastated.  The group and 
its two leaders, both DSS social workers, advised them to work toward an 
intermediate relationship with their daughter that took the pressure off 
without severing ties altogether.

Groups like the Newton one not only benefit the adoptive parents, they also 
preserve a home base for troubled children.  Sadly, such support is rare.  
In the 1989-90 fiscal year, for the first time, DSS plans to allocate funds 
for postplacement counseling for adoptive parents, following the lead of 
Illinois and New Jersey.  But, as yet, the Newton group, begun 2 and 1/2 
years ago by the local DSS office, is one of only a handful of its kind in 
the state.

Massachusetts Adoption Resource Exchange, a clearing-house that matches 
parents with older children with special needs, occasionally holds 
"disruption meetings: after an adoption fails.  The parents, former foster 
parents, social workers, and others analyze what went wrong and plan the 
child's future.  But by their very nature these meetings only happen after 
it's too late.  "Maybe these meetings should take place before the 
disruption," says MARE director Carolyn Smith.

Few DSS social workers on the front lines are well versed in adoption 
issues.  They pull out all the stops to save biological families.  But, 
according to some adoption specialists, DSS is often quicker to split up 
adoptive families.  "The people that ought to help families stay together 
wind up blaming the parents," says Steven Nickman, a child psychiatrist at 
Massachusetts General Hospital.  "They say, 'You screwed up.' Most of the 
time, the parents just want to help."

Private adoption agencies -- even those that place older children -- don't 
offer much counseling for adoptive parents, either.  "We've knelt for a 
long time with our heads in the sand, thinking when we place kids with 
problems that they won't need services down the road," says Mary Byrne, 
assistant executive director of Boston Children's Services, an agency that 
primarily places older children.

Boston's Project Impact is one of the few adoption agencies that offer a 
crisis intervention service.  A staff member virually moves in with the 
faltering family and tries to reopen communications and revive commitment 
to the adoption.  Such postplacement support has reduced the disruption 
rate.  Unfortunately, Project Impact can only provide crisis service to one 
family at a time.  "We're not prepared to write any child off," says Robert 
Lewis, Impact's director.

Often, the only resort for adoptive families is a private therapist.  But 
few professional schools have courses on the pyschology of adoption.  
Without specialized training, some therapists may adhere to either of two 
myths that prevail in American society.  One is that adoptive families are 
no different from other families; the other is that they are different -- 
and inferior.

"Some therapists think you're peculiar for ever adopting a child," says one 
psychiatrist who has adopted eight children.  "They start questioning your 
motives.  You need help managing the kid, and they're saying, 'Why did you 
do this?'"

Of the psychiatrist's eight children, five were adopted as infants, while 
three others came as older children from Vietnam.  Most of them adjusted 
easily.  But two boys from a Vietnamese orphanage got into trouble and 
shied away from trusting their new parents.  In the end the psychiatrist 
sent them to "the ultimate residential placement" -- the US military.  Now 
he proudly displays photos of them in uniform.

The South Korean hospital for disabled children where Sally Clemons found 
her adoptive son, Jacob, in 1980 provided a scant 1 and 1/2 page summary 
about him.  It told her little other than that he was 6 years old, suffered 
from cerebral palsy, and had been separated from his biological parents in 
infancy.

When she brought Jacob home to Maryland, where she is the director of an 
adoption agency, she soon recognized from his behavior that he had been 
sexually and physically abused.  He remained detached from his parents and 
their 14 other adopted children, and had to be ordered to join in family 
outings.  After Clemons helped several of her other Korean-born children to 
locate their biological parents, he became jealous and depressed.  Unable 
to reach him, the Clemonses eventually placed Jacob in a foster home.

"There are two types of kids: apples and onions," Sally Clemons says.  "The 
apple has a core, and you can build on that.  The onion, you can peel and 
peel away and never find a core."  Jacob, she says, is an onion.

No one knows for sure how many international adoptions crumble.  But the 
same inadequacies of information and counseling that undermine many 
domestic adoptions are often magnified when the children come from 
overseas.  South Korea, the largest source of children for the United 
States, rarely acknowledges that children have been sexually abused there: 
"There is just a nationalistic attitude that this doesn't happen," Sally 
Clemons says.

When one couple in the Newton group adopted a 9-year-old boy from Central 
America, the government agency there only allowed them to riffle through 
his file for a moment.  When their son became a heavy drug user several 
years later, they consulted a therapist and a bilingual specialist.  But 
the therapist was unfamiliar with Central America and the bilingual 
specialist was untrained in adoption.  Now their son is wanted by the 
police, and they are burdened with guilt.

"We have a moral responsibility," says his mother.  "We brought him into 
this country."

As adolescents, many children from overseas stuggle with divided loyalties. 
Joyce Pavao, program director of the adoptive consulting team at the Family 
Center counseling service, in Somerville, recalls that a Dover couple 
contacted her after their 13-year-old son tried to kill himself.  They had 
adopted him at the age of 5 in Colombia and changed his name from Jose to 
Trevor.  Shortly before the suicide attempt, they told Pavao, they had 
asked Trevor to sign some naturalization papers.

When Pavao spoke to Trevor privately, he said that he had lost his country, 
his language and his name.  When he realized that he was going to lose his 
Colombian citizenship, too, he decided on suicide.  Pavao persuaded his 
parents to restore his name to Jose and let him choose his citizenship.  
When she saw him again, recently, his spirits has improved, and he was 
about to leave with his father for a bicycling trip through Colombia.

Jacob Clemons, the Korean boy with cerebral palsy, was not so fortunate.  
Abused in his foster home, he moved back with the Clemons family.  Last 
October 30, in an apparent suicide attempt, he set fire to the mattress in 
his downstairs bedroom, killing two of his younger adoptive brothers.  
Later, his parents urged a judge to try the 15-year-old as an adult.  Their 
request was denied, and Jacob is now institutionalized in a psychiatric 
hospital for juveniles.

"I wonder if it was our belief that adoption is forever that made us stick 
it out so long," David Clemons told the court.

When Joan Gordon brought her daugher to Bradley Hospital in East 
Providence, she was surprised to hear that it already had a file on Lisa.  
She was shocked when she learned what it contained.

After Lisa had been accused of killing a cat in a foster home in 1981, she 
had been evaluated at Bradley.  The report concluded that she needed 
long-term psychiatric help and that it was better to spend money now than 
later.  It recommended admitting her to Bradley.

Nevertheless, the state had placed Lisa in a group home.  Then, without 
telling the Gordons about the evaluation, it had given her to them.  "There 
was enough indications so that the state know she had a bad problem," Joan 
says.  "They kept her in a confined environment until they found two 
suckers out there and palmed her off on them.  What I want people to be 
aware of is that you can't rely on the state.  You have to ask for the file 
and read it from cover to cover."

Thomas Bohan, chief counsel for the Department of Children and Their 
Families, acknowledges tht the Gordons should have been told about the 
evaluation.  He says that the "unintentional failure" to inform them 
resulted from a lack of communication among social workers who handled 
Lisa's case around the time of the adoption.  "One worker thought that 
another worker had discussed it with them in detail," he says.

With Lisa back in Bradley Hospital, the state offered to terminate the 
Gordons' parental rights and take custody.  But that route would leave the 
Gordons liable for Lisa's medical expenses.  They thought that the state 
should pay her bills, since they would not have adopted Lisa if the state 
had not deceived them, as they put it, about her need for psychiatric 
treatment.  The Gordons decided to seek a reversal of the adoption on the 
grounds that they had been defrauded.

In 1987, they filed suit in the family court that had granted the adoption, 
but it ruled that it lacked jurisdiction.  They appealed to the Rhode 
Island Supreme Court, which overturned the ruling in February 1988 and 
ordered the family court to hear her case.  Five months later, the state 
agreed to a consent order setting aside the adoption.

Despite the victory, the Gordons did not feel triumphant.  They were deeply 
in debt, having rejected the urgings of their relatives to seek damages for 
mental anguish.  "Our family kept saying, 'With everything you've been 
through, go for the bucks,'" Joan says.  "It was tempting, but I didn't 
want to use Lisa for my own personal gain."

Shortly afterward, the Gordons separated, with Joan moving into an 
apartment.  The agony of the adoption had taken an irreversible toll on 
their marriage.  "It brought out the worst in all of us," Joan says.  "It 
brought out sides of us we didn't know were there."  Sheila is now living 
with her father.

The Gordons had already said goodbye to Lisa in her hospital room.  Joan 
was the last one in the family to see her.  When she walked in, Lisa was 
crying.  "I was very tranquilized," Joan says.  "It was like having a child 
die.  I was in a grieving period over her.  I told her, 'It isn't because 
we don't love you.  It's because we love you and we tried to get help for 
you.'"

As she left the room, Joan took two identical lapel pins of tiny metal mice 
out of her pocket.  She gave one to her ex-daughter, saying, "When I wear 
mine, I'll think of you.  When you wear yours, think of me."

    In the Globe article in the previous note, a spokesperson from the 
    National Committee for Adoption was quoted and the NCA was referred to
    as an "advocacy" group.
    
    The National Committee for Adoption is a *powerful* and well-funded
    group of right wing individuals who provide paid lobbyists to work in
    Washington who hold views such as: the continuation of closed
    adoption records, taking away women's rights to safe and legal
    abortions, arguing that there are no moral or ethical issues regarding
    surrogate contracts and that the only problem with surrogate contracts
    is that there aren't sufficient laws to support the process and
    offering suggestions for *highly* restrictive reunion registries (i.e.
    that adoptees would need permission from their adoptive parents to
    register and that information would only be released if all parties to
    the adoption, birthmother, birthfather, etc.) had registered with the
    registry, and btw, the restrictive reunion registery is being suggested
    in lieu of open adoption records.  Get the picture?
    
    Laura
    

                       WINDS OF CHANGE...

                            Adoption in The New Age


                  American Adoption Congress
                 12th International Conference

                      May 23 - 27, 1990

                   Chicago Marriott O'Hare
                    8535 W. Higgins Road
                     Chicago, Illinois



This four-day symposium led by adoption experts and professionals will 
provide triad members and professionals with updated information about 
adoption and its effects and wil challenge all participants to work toward 
achieving equitable access to information currently denied triad members.  
Come join those with a common interest in adoption reform to expand your 
knowledge of adoption-related issues and to share with us your own 
expertise.

Highlightes include clinical overviews, activist workshops, self-help 
workshops, special interest luncheons, roundtable and panel discussions, 
open support groups, AAC networking and town meeting.

To obtain a conference brochure call AAC special events department: 
212-988-0110 
 
or write:

AAC
401 E. 74th Street, #17-D
New York, New York 10021