I almost wrote this into the last post but I was too busy waxing poetic.
For some adoptive parents (myself included) there was loss in my journey towards adoption (infertility, miscarriages) but adoption itself for me? No loss! (You’ll notice I used “I” statements when talking about loss in my last post. That was deliberate.) For me it was all gain and no loss. None. Zero. Zilch.
Someone (not me, not necessarily any of you) could argue that I “lost” being the only mother and I’d say, “I didn’t lose that — it’s how adoption works.” It only looks like loss if I define adoption (as some folks do) against the backdrop of conceiving and birthing a kid.
This was not something I thought before (read my archives if you don’t believe me) but it’s something I think now. Like I could also say I missed out on being pregnant with Madison, right? See how that stops working when there’s no backdrop? Because in adoption I couldnt give birth to said adoptive child because then it’s not adoption, right? So there’s no loss for me there seeing as how it’s the definition of adoption. It’d be like saying that I lost not getting to know Noah’s first mom. It makes no sense. (Again, this isn’t something that I always felt but I feel it now.)
All of my losses happened before Madison and before we even started thinking well and truly about adoption. Again, “I” statements. Other folks might feel differently and I’m sure not saying they shouldn’t.
Related posts:
Family preservation would also have to address adoption policies, such as pressuring a mother in a hospital room to sign adoption consent papers right after giving birth. In many jurisdictions, a mother has 24-48 hours to revoke her consent. A family preservationist may want these time frames extended, as it would give mom and child more time together and more time to prepare for parenting.
She obviously has nine months to decide and make a plan, but her frame of mind can change dramatically after giving birth, and I suppose the adoption industry is quite aware of that fact, and that’s why speedy surrenders are preferred and short revocation periods are there to favour the potential adopters, not the child or the mother or father.
A family preservationist may also disagree with potential adopters developing a relationship with the expectant mother, as she may feel pressured and obligated to surrender. That is not helping a family stay together, rather encouraging permananent family separation.
A family preservationsist may also want an independent legal representation for mother, father and child and the potential adopters. One attorney representing all parties can be viewed as highly unethical.
I wouldn’t disagree with any of that
In fact, I agree with it.
Thanks for elaborating, Michelle.
I should add, having come to this topic rather late and consequently having being distracted from the original post by some of the later responses, that, from an a-parent perspective, I’m not conscious of any personal loss through adoption whatsoever. Only gain.
Of course, I am in a position to make a comparison.
Kippa wrote: “Thanks for elaborating, Michelle.”
No problem, Kippa.
And I’d say you are definitely in a position to make a comparison.