I’m tempted to link Suzherm’s whole comment but I’ll just do bits and pieces:
primal wound goes beyond the original intended victims (IMO). there is collateral damage to the extended natural family members as well – for generations. my sons have lost a sister, my mother her first grandchild, my sister her first niece.
This is a really good point. I definitely see this in my family (the child in our family is now grown and has since reunited but it’s not been anything near a happy ever after ending) and I definitely see this in Jessica’s family. I almost don’t want to apply the words “primal wound” to this though because I think it deserves it’s own name. Dismemberment almost works here, I think, because we’re talking about a limb literally cut off the family tree. Even in an open adoption with absolute openness, there is still this great loss for, say, a grandparent experiencing their child as a parent. It’s just a loss. Period. Even if it’s best for everyone. Even if everyone wanted it.
i suspect many adoptives may feel the need to disregard the primal wound concept much the way they demonize ther natural mother. for to acknowledge the primal wound, might mean they have to acknowledge their part in it. (I think you were getting at this in your numerous posts). For adoptives to admit that they werent/arent the be all and end all perfect in every way solution for a child, must be a difficult thing to acknowledge when you have been fed the social construct crap that adoption is golly gee, perfect for all concerned. it is not. every member of the adoption plane loses, has pain. pain that cannot be fixed, erased by adoption.
I don’t think adoptive parents are ever a solution to the problem. It’s more that adoptive parents (ideally) are in service to the family who chooses adoption and to the child who comes to them via adoption. (We parents are in service to our kids, period, however they show up in our families really.)
It’s so so so hard to explain what I mean here but I’m going to try. I cannot “fix” Madison but I also don’t believe Madison is broken. That’s not to discount her loss or the harm it’s caused her but it’s to say that I don’t think she’s damaged goods because of it.
It’s like when I was first working at Women Against Rape (I solicited donations door-to-door. I had green hair. I didn’t make much money) and learned that we said “survivors of sexual abuse” instead of “victims of sexual abuse.” I think of Madison as a survivor of adoption. Survivor gives her (in my mind) power and encouragement. Survivor doesn’t discount the seriousness of her loss but doesn’t dictate the consequences. I also think Jessica is a survivor of adoption. Just because she freely made the decision doesn’t mean she escaped the repercussions. (I do not blame the victim; I do not blame the survivor.)
I’m not demonizing adoption either; I’m not anti-adoption (I’m also not equating adoption with sexual abuse!). When people say, “So are you saying that adoption damages a child sitting in a poorly run institutional orphanage? Or a child languishing in foster care? Or worse yet, living with an abusive parent?” Of course not but I see those things as being part of adoption. If you lose your family and then gain another family, that second family can’t “cure” you of the loss of your first family. Adoption doesn’t “save” a child, right? Besides which because adoption is predicated on loss, one might argue that adoption itself is loss then gain. First a child must lose his or her family and then he or she gains a new family. Those of us getting a child sometimes forget that adoption isn’t about us at all; it’s about that child who sees both sides of the adoption coin. That child we’re “saving” from foster care or an orphange may really be in need of saving but the first half of the adoption — the loss — is what put him or her there. See? Two sides, one coin.
It’s like if you have a house and the house burns down and you lose everything in it. You have insurance and the insurance replaces the house and replaces the stuff but you still lost a house. You still had the trauma of a fire. You can be happy in your new house, you can be grateful, you can even feel lucky but you still lost a house. You still lost everything in it. The new house doesn’t cure the loss of your old house; losing your house is one thing and getting the new house is another.
This all sounds so dire, doesn’t it? It’s not. Well, it is but it’s not. Remember, I don’t believe adoptees are damaged goods. They are survivors of loss and those of us who are parenting them through it don’t have to see them as victims to help them integrate their experiences into the rest of their lives.
Possibly related posts:
First, I wanted to thank you so much for this series of posts—I have learned so much in just a few days which is really amazing. I was thinking, perhaps another analogy would be to think of adoption as a bit like divorce. The second marriage never “replaces” the first and no matter how good and wonderful it is, it doesn’t negate how awful it was to loose the first marriage. You still have the memories and you still have to make sense of the first. Just as second marriages can be happy and there can be “good” divorces, I think there is a spectrum with adoption too. But, thank you so much for making me think so much with these posts.
I cannot “fix†Madison but I also don’t believe Madison is broken. That’s not to discount her loss or the harm it’s caused her but it’s to say that I don’t think she’s damaged goods because of it.
I completely get what you are saying and dont feel you are stating she is broken. We all have our issues, disabilities, weaknesses. What I hear you doing is validating Madisons “possible” adoptoin related trauma, being sensitive to it, being willing to admit it may/most likely is therefore giving her permission to acknowledge that for herself. You are providing room in your emotional family system for her feelings – whatever they may be. Many adoptive families dont do that.
Frankly, my own daughter has the feeling that her own adoption is “taboo”. She cannot discuss it with her parents. How then can she ever reconcile me in her life? How can she ever fully integrate who she is – completely – if the very people she has spent her life with dont accept it? Dont they then somehow give her the message that is not acceptable? That something is wrong with her? Quite a different message they are sending versus the one you are to Madison.
Okay you made me post so that I don’t hog your blog.
My great-great-grandmother was orphaned, placed on an orphan train and then fostered by another family and I still believe I can see the repercussions in my family. I know that might seem far-fetched for some people, but I knew her, and I know my great grandfather, my grandmother and my mother and I can see it as plain as day.
“I also don’t believe Madison is broken.”
What has been worrying me recently is that maybe my kids ARE broken emotionally and I don’t know it – maybe even THEY don’t know it. What if deep deep down they’re feeling the loss of their families, but they can’t recognize what it is, are afraid to talk about it, or pretend it isn’t there?
I worry that in spite of keeping communication open, encouraging discussion of their mothers, families and feelings about them, they may be choosing to keep all the pain inside or just pretending it isn’t there. It frightens me to think of the impact this could have on their emotional health as they grow to adulthood.
Adoption is painful, even if we can’t express it outloud. There is a tremendous amount of gratefulness involved in being “saved” (a world we hear, even if YOU-birthparents-don’t.) So even if we want to search, or wonder what life might have been like, we often feel too guilty to do so. We don’t want to hurt your feelings. I don’t believe in adoptees who aren’t interested. Nobody is that shallow. We’re human beings, not animals. this is not a reflection of your parenting. The house fire is a good analogy is good, the divorce is not–you have a choice in marraige. Adoptees have no choices.
[...] For those coming in on a link from a bulletin board: Another entry that might interest you re., the teatime discussion. For this line, “My kids did not lose a family! They gained!” This one’s for you: Adoption Verbosity [...]
[...] is joy but only because someone else is grieving. Adoption means your kid gets parents but s/he had to lose parents first. In other words, when we think about adoption we usually only think about one side and not the [...]