I’ve been thinking on this all night
May 5, 2004 Adoption
Rob was nice enough to come and comment on the last post so now you guys can see the conversation we were having on his site. For the record, I didn’t think that Rob was trying to be offensive at all with the “glorified babysitting” comment and I wasn’t offended by it. I think that from the outside, it’s difficult to understand how open adoption works and even when we do understand, it doesn’t mean that it’s right for all of us. And that’s not just on the side of the adoptive parents. In our adoption support group, most of the parents wanted more openness then their children’s birth parents did. There’s no right way to do this, I think. As long as the waiting adoptive parents are behaving as ethically as possible, examining their own biases (adoption takes a lot of soul searching), and are ready to allow flexibility as their family demands it, they are doing all they can. Not all of us will arrive to the same conclusions.
Both Rob and Donna say that the birth mother on 20/20 wanted to parent and was prevented from doing so due to economic and familial pressure. Listen, when it comes to coercion — even “loving” coercion by concerned parents — all bets are off. The adoption is predicated on force. Of course this happens. Even the most sensitive agency or advocate may end up being involved in a coercive adoption because when the coercion is happening outside of the agency — meaning when the ethical agency isn’t trying to force a woman’s hand — whatever counseling and help they might offer, they can’t entirely combat it.
In this case, that young woman should have been helped to parent her baby. I hope that the openness she was able to arrange helps somewhat but my gosh, she didn’t want to place her baby! And then I hear about the 2-year old whose mother was homeless so she placed her child, too? I don’t know. The entire show sounds like a disrespectful circus.
(Check out the review at Ethica for more about that program.)
OK, on to the discussion. Donna mentions, too, that the family the young woman did not choose already had an open adoption that was working great. I assume that she meant that the young woman trying to choose a family should have been more open to their saying she would be like “an aunt or an older sister.” Here’s the thing: birth parents are all unique human beings. What works for one would not work for another. That’s wonderful that they were able to create a terrific relationship with the other child’s birth mom but that doesn’t mean that they’re the right family for any one else considering adoption.
I understand what the couple were saying when they used those terms above but of course a birth mother is not an aunt or a sister — she’s a birth mother. Now that may just be semantics but if it bothered that young woman, then that was the wrong couple for her.
Although 20/20 would have you think so, adoption is not a competition. It’s not. Let’s say your profile is shown to a potential birth mom along with 9 other profiles. And she chooses the the gay couple with a dog. Now if that gay couple with the dog weren’t in the pool, that doesn’t mean you might have had a better chance to be chosen. Maybe what she’s looking for is a gay couple with a dog so that straight couple with a pool wouldn’t have looked good no matter what. I know from talking to our agency that many parents considering adoption look over the profiles and then ask to see more. Or contact another agency. Or contact a lawyer. If the right family isn’t in the agencies books, then the agency tries to assist them in finding another family elsewhere. From what I understand, this is common. Other agencies contact our agency, too.
When we understand that there is no competition, it’s easier to appreciate why the young woman on 20/20 chose one family and not the other. It really doesn’t matter whether or not we approve of her reasoning because she has to go where her heart leads her. And how much more difficult given that her heart was truly leading her to parent.
Donna said that we’re lucky that J. doesn’t entertain ideas about “what if” she’d chosen to parent. Actually she may have “what if” ideas but I said she doesn’t have romantic ideas, by which I mean that while it would be natural to wonder what might have been, she’s not fantasizing about an idealized child. In an adoption where the child and his or her birth parents don’t have access to each other, the child is far more likely to idealize his or her parents and research bears out that a birth mom who can’t see her kid is more likely to idealize him or her, too, much the way someone who has lost an infant to death idealizes the child who might have been.
I’ll add that we do not have access to Madison’s birth father (his choice) and so I feel like I’m on both sides of this. I’m going to try to write later (Madison is sleeping in the sling now and I don’t know if I’ll get the chance again today) about the parts of open adoption that have been really hard. I mean the kinds of things that have made me realize that this is not for everyone.
Also, I want to reiterate that I don’t think that Brett and I are better than other adoptive parents who want less openness. We’re the right parents for Madison, which is why J. chose us — that’s all. I think I’m giving the false impression that there’s only one “right” way to adopt and I just don’t believe that. Of course I think that my way is the best way because we generally believe our own way is the best way. But I recognize that best way for me doesn’t translate to best way for the world. Just wanted to make sure I got that in there.
May 5th, 2004 at 12:41 pm
This is sort of a hijack, but I think economic pressure is often portrayed as the best and/or only reason to give up a child for adoption. Emotional unreadiness is thought of as a weak excuse, one that a person will outgrow (or one that “everyone” experiences but “good” parents overcome), while financial unreadiness is thought of as something that will always be a problem (and will significantly damage the child). IMHO this is part and parcel with the prevailing notion that poverty is a character flaw, and also the very American idea that providing for children financially/materially is the most important thing a parent can do (i.e. I may not spend time/energy on my children, but at least they have a college fund). There is as much stigma for a wealthy woman who chooses to give up a baby as there is for a poor woman who chooses to parent. Those who are financially stable have a “duty” to parent, whether biologically or through adoption, and those who are not have an “obligation” to give their children “a better life,” as if a poor (or young) person is any less capable of parenting.
May 5th, 2004 at 1:30 pm
I just stumbled upon your site from comments elsewhere, but wanted you to know that I appreciate your perspective. I’m not involved in adoption at all and am not yet ready to parent, but have learned a lot by popping in here. I didn’t appreciate the 20/20 approach because of the comparisons made during the actual show. People said that this was like trying out for a sports team or being on a reality tv show. I just feel like there was so much more at stake here than whether or not you make varsity. Anyway, thanks.
May 5th, 2004 at 1:51 pm
That was the thought that kept running through my mind while looking at the commercials for the 20/20 show and at the material on ABC’s website - that this was someone who whould change her mind and decide to parent. Perhaps she should have been allowed to make that decision herself - without TV cameras getting in the way. It may be that she does change her mind before the adoption is finalized and/or when her parental rights are terminated. I doubt that anyone at ABC bothered to give this child counseling, or even mentioned that it might be a good idea for everyone involved. That would have interfered with their “must-watch TV”, so I guess doing the right thing for everyone involved wasn’t the plan.
May 5th, 2004 at 6:26 pm
I think what I said about being blessed came out wrong. Of course birth mothers will wonder “what if?” That’s human nature. (and I wouldn’t use blessed and lucky interchangably)
The advertising for the 20/20 show was much more offensive to me than the actual show. At first they were calling it a competition and a reality show, which it clearly isn’t. Barbara Walters has since apologized for the poor choice in advertising, but that doesn’t erase the “circus” that’s imprinted in my mind.
You and J. came together for a reason, be it fate, destiny, or some higher power.
Most of my comments were directed at the editing. I didn’t mean to even suggest that the couple with a current open situation were any better than the other couples. The birth mother has every right to choose the family that she believes is right for her and the baby, no matter what those reasons are.
May 6th, 2004 at 10:49 pm
Dawn, thanks for this dialogue. Though I’ve never posted to your blog before, I’ve also been thinking about your latest posts and my response to them all night. I am the mama of a 16 month-old daughter born in China. We considered all types of adoption, and chose the best process for us. It may be true with international adoption that it initially appears possible to “deny” the presence of birthparents, but of course, this isn’t so. Certainly, it is necessary to acknowledge and explain the presence of our daughter’s birthparents, despite having no information about them. In addition, we must acknowledge the presence of our daughter’s first caregivers - the “aunties” at the orphanage, who nurtured her lovingly for nearly a year. We experienced their love and loss first-hand when we visited the orphanage and saw the sorrow of Ping’s Auntie as she held the baby she raised for the last time. I think of all the early parents in my child’s life on a daily basis, and I am grateful for their roles in Ping’s life.
Our strengths as parents, and as adoptive parents specifically, are varied. My husband and I did not prioritize parenting an infant, and we knew that the process of domestic adoption (i.e. “selling ourselves” to prospective birth mothers) and of open adoption (facilitating the ongoing relationship with our child’s birthfamily) were not things we felt we could handle well. On the other hand, we felt very comfortable adopting a somewhat older child, parenting a child of a different race and birth culture, and potentially handling the issues that might surround adopting a child living in an orphanage. We considered our own strengths carefully before adopting and discussed what we could handle and what we couldn’t.
Regardless of how we have come to parent a child, our children will ultimately teach us what aspects of their upbringing worked for them and what didn’t. Whether we choose open adoption, international adoption, egg or sperm donation, etc., sensitive, thoughtful and introspective parents will learn along the way with our children as we go. No path is easy, and no one path is right for everyone. I feel it’s absolutely valid to know if open adoption or international adoption is not the right choice for you. We made the best choice for us, and it was not based on denial.
I know you weren’t judging other adoptive parents, and I really value your experiences and opinions. And I wish you huge congratulations on your new daughter!!
Brooklyn Mama