Being Anti-adoption and other forms of irrationality

The other day I heard of one of my contacts that an adoption lobbyist, familiar with some work I've been involved in, is trying to dismiss that work on the grounds that I am supposedly anti-adoption. The work, which is a well documented exposé of child trafficking cases, in the minds of the adoption lobby seems to lose value, once the anti-adoption label can be assigned. Corruption and illegal practices simply cease to exist, once the documentation of those activities is perfomed or supported by someone whom the anti-adoption label can be applied to.

These tactics remind me somewhat of the presidential elections where we could see similar remarks. He is a liberal, he is a socialist, he is a muslim. As soon as the label is applied that person is somehow rendered irrelevant or dangerous, radical and certainly irrational. Facts raised by a labelled person just stop being facts, they somehow can be treated as fodder. A foreign policy analysis cannot be trusted because someone is labeled a muslim, an observation about the state of the economy is riduculous because someone is labeled a liberal, or even worse a socialist and the documentation of a child trafficking case is simply untrue because the messenger is labeled anti-adoption.

In his interview with Meet the Press of  Sunday October 19, 2008, Colin Powell made the following statement:

The correct answer is, he is not a Muslim, he’s a Christian. He’s always been a Christian. But the really right answer is, what if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer’s no, that’s not America.

Skipping the question of whether I am anti-adoption. What if I am anti-adoption? Is there something wrong with being against adoption in this world? I think the answer should also be "no". There are very rational reasons to be against adoption which I outlined in When is adoption an acceptable option? and I yet have to hear a an intelligent refutation of the position taken in that post. But even if that position would be refuted would that mean child trafficking suddenly didn't take place in China, Columbia, Ethiopia or India? If that's the case I am not going to pay my taxes this year, because my forms were delivered by a mail man who is a socialist muslim.

0

What if I am anti-adoption?

What if I am anti-adoption? Is there something wrong with being against adoption in this world? I think the answer should also be "no". There are very rational reasons to be against adoption which I outlined in When is adoption an acceptable option? and I yet have to hear a an intelligent refutation of the position taken in that post.

It was an excellent post, except it was misnamed.  The question "When is adoption an acceptable option?" is not addressed.  It advances many well reasoned socio-economic arguments about the wrongs of adoption in its present form.  But unless I missed it, there wasn't one example put forth of when adoption is an acceptable option.

Can you cite one?

Dad

Interesting...

As an adoptee, who had records altered, names and birth facts changed, and years of endured "hidden abuse" within my adoptive family, I too would like to know when adoption IS an acceptable option.

I doubt you'll find a more

I doubt you'll find a more abusive and toxic relationship than the one that exists between my wife's mentally ill brother and his natural mother.  But it would be wrong on several levels to use their dysfunctional relationship to advance an argument against natural family preservation in general.

My personal litmus test to determine the difference between an adoption reform advocate and an anti-adoption position is two prong.

1)  In its present form, do they believe adoption can be an acceptable option?  If so, under what circumstances?  A closet anti-adoptionist will dance forever around this question.

2)  What reforms (such as open records, amended birth certificates, revocation periods to name but a few) would make adoption acceptable to you?

An adoption reformist will answer these questions.  An adoption abolitionist doesn't accept adoption, period.

Dad

there are always other options

When I wrote When is adoption an acceptable option?, its title was meant to be rhetorical. In it I tried to sum up the various forms of adoption and in all honesty I couldn't find any appropriate reason to use the child placement measure of adoption.

For domestic infant adoption I used the argument that proper socio-economic improvement renders that form of child placement unnecessary. When we look at countries in Western Europe it's evident that domestic adoption doesn't need to exist. A well developed country doesn't need to have that many teen pregnancies and poverty to the extent people can't take care of their childen. Apart from socio-economical factors, the big difference between Western Europe and the US with respect to domestic infant adoption is the political/religious influence of the adoption agencies. In conjuction with the pro-life movement there remains a constant pull to increase domestic adoption even to the point where federal money was given to promote adoption among preganancy center professionals. In effect it's mainly the industry that keeps the phenomenon alive purely for self-sustainance reasons. The best interest of a child is not served by this form of adoption.

International adoption is by and large a buyers market, just like domestic infant adoption is. When it comes to saving orphans, as the practitioners of that form of adoption claim, they do a very poor job. According to Unicef there are supposedly 145 million oprhans while the world wide market for international adoption is close to 40,000 children. So less than 0.03% of all orphans are being adopted annually, which makes adoption an ineffective futility in the cause of "saving orphans". When we look at the sending countries involved in international adoption, it is even more striking that most of these countries are not really poor. Of the top four sending countries (making up 2/3 of the global supply): China, Russia, South Korea and Ethiopia (I omit Guatemala, because it has already closed its borders), only Ethiopia is a poor country that understandably has problems taking care of their "orphan" population. South Korea has a sociatal bias against children born out of wedlock and against mixed race and should solve their own issues, instead of dumping their children on the global market. China has implemented a one-child policy they should take the responsibility for and Russia very much suffers from social problems such as alcoholism. None of these three countries is poor, in fact all three had enough money to organize the Olympics, so they should all be capable of solving their own problems. International adoption in effect only prolongs their sociatal ills.

Finally we have adoption from foster care, the only form where child placement in my opinion is an acceptable option, but I don't think adoption is the solution. It is evident that some families take really poor care of children and some are downright abusive to their children. It goes without saying that as a result some children cannot live with their natural family. To take care of those children most countries have set up a foster care system, but only a few countries have deliberately defined that as a temporary solution. In reality it is not a temporary solution, given the many children that end up in the foster care system to only leave it when aging out. So reality and ideology don't go hand in hand. The reason foster care is defined in some countries as temporary has much to do with adoption agency involvement. Prior to the late 1970's there was no adoption from foster care. The entire phenomenon was instigated by adoption agencies that were exploring new markets after the decline of domestic infant adoption in the aftermath of Roe v Wade. Again we see adoption agency involvement in the policy makings, a phenomenon not known to Western Europe, which unsurprisingly doesn't know adoption from foster care (at least not on the main land). Foster care does not have to be defined as temporary, a mixed approach, where foster care is partially temporary and partially permanent can cover all services needed by children that cannot live with their natural family. Instead of adoption, foster parents could just as well receive permanent guardianship. Parental ties don't necessarily need to be severed altogether. There is no need to do that. With the right implementation of permanent guardianship, natural parents when considered too much of a risk to their children can statutorily lose the right to claim their children, making foster care placement just as permanent as adoption would be, without the side effects adoption gives. No child is served by having its name and birth certificates changed and no child is served by being legally hindered to learn about its natural family. On top of that, why should abusive parents that have the money not be held accountable by paying child support?

So indeed I cannot see any acceptable form of adoption. In all cases there are either ways to prevent the placement altogether or to use other forms of child placement that are less radical. Does that make me anti-adoption? I don't know, I don't think in those terms. I am all for safe child placement. So a child can be safe from predation by the placement system, a child can be safe when needed to be placed and a child can safely leave the system when the time has come to stand on its own two feet.

Anti-Adoption

Ok I have to admit I am on the fence with this one. My mother was adopted to keep Hitler from sending her to the gas chambers with the rest of the Jews including my grandparents. I never knew I was Jewish until 1998 but I always knew I hated my life and didn't want to live. So on the one hand adoption saved my mother but on the other hand if she hadn't been adopted I would have never been born and would not have had to live the horrible life that I had to live. I spent years being molested and beaten and then had to bury one of my own children and now I have had to watch my own grandchild be kidnapped and know that I will never see him again. Because I decided to expose their corruption I have been to jail once and now will go again and then off to prison for a crime I did not commit just so they can shut me up. I have less then 30 days left and they say for the trumped up charge they got me with I could do 10 years. I guess you could say it has come full circle my grandparents died in the camps and now I will die in prison. So I guess your right my mother should not have been adopted and I should never have been born since I am not real found of living in this awful world anyway.

Dana

Jewish foster children during WWII

Hi Dana,

I am so sorry you are going through all this and reading the history you speak of even saddens me more.

The mother of a friend of mine also experienced the separation from her family during the second world war. Her parents were sent off to a concentration camp, while she lived with a family somewhere in the rural parts of the Netherlands. Her parents did return from the concentration camps after the war was over and when they tried to reclaim their child they had a hard time doing so. Their experience wasn't uncommon at the time. Many jewish children here in the Netherlands were placed with protestant families who raised these children in their religious tradition. Upon return, many jewish parents were confronted with foster families unwilling to return the children, often because of the religious conviction of the foster parents. The National Committee instituted after the second world war to solve these issues played a rather dubious role in this, choosing sided with the foster families. Oficially none of these children were adopted, because the Netherlands didn't have an adoption law at the time, which was only instantiated in 1956.

life-sentence

Over the years I have met with and written to many adoptees who have tried to commit suicide because they hated their lives so much.  I would be amazed by the irony that so many of us wished we were aborted before sentenced to a life of hell on earth.  [This no longer amazes me, it simply saddens me, very deeply.]

I have seen one steady trend within the adoption industry:  private agencies and their paid workers are looking for quantity, whereas mothers and children are seeking quality. 

What good is being saved if the resulting life-sentence is pure misery? 

[I HAVE to believe our struggle to bring change within child placement practices is the legacy we must try to leave those who have no idea how broken families destroy the human spirit.]

 

I am not real found of

I am not real found of living in this awful world myself...

But I am stuck here. So since I am... I figure those who made my life the hell it WAS... are gonna feel my frustration and over the last 6 years... I think they are beginning to... as my name is used to slap them around with regularly. And they have years and years more coming there way.. till I am an old man and dead.

However found of living in this awful world we are not... what we should be is found of is .. is the idea...

Dana, I spent almost my whole life locked up.... to be honest it was not that bad... I bet you would get treated better in jail... then any retirement home found in Canada....

Trust me when I say... you'd have a far better and safer time....

I guess I grew up different then most people..... that was supposed to be funny...

But after some thinkin on it.. funny or not.... it's true...

When I am ready to enter a retirement home when I am old cause my kids won't take care of me or the rich stole them all and sold them....

I am gonna do like an armed robbery or something get myself 10 years in jail...best part is... it's totaly 100% free... and you get medical care in jail.. that today beats most hospitals...

After all is said and done a institution is just a institution no matter who runs is or who profits or gains by it or who does not...

Seems anything the rich touch they kill...

Dana we need to make sure we stick around to keep reminding them of that...

We were not put here for our own pleasure, I don't know about you but that was pretty obvious to me from day 1...

So for now... just raise some hell.... if you make a loud enouph stink and everyone is watching.. they tend to back down...

But see I know the drill with them since childhood, where most of you do not.. jail, foster care, a shelter, group homes... they were all the same to me.... just some rich people making a living off the backs of children... people like myself... with a few in the middle to think they are helping... but if you asked them they would not willing put their own children in foster care... just the poor's... while they make disgusting salaries..and their bosses making tripple digit salaries... with lots of perks..

Oh Dana you should have seen how they attempted to deal with me..... didn't go to well for them...

10 police officers guns drawn and even pointed at my cat... I shit you not..
Tried to lock me away, banned me off the internet for a year... they just kept dumping it on me...

They will do the same to you.. it's how they work.... just like in the school yard...

He he he he .... * * * * and for me just like in the school yard.. they got in right in the mouth...

Sand up straight Dana.... trust me..... pop em right in the mouth...

Those kinda people ain't worth the spit we all walk on all day long...

sad reality

I bet you would get treated better in jail... then any retirement home found in Canada....

When I worked as a staff-nurse at a private hospital, I used to joke that the average age of our patients was 83.  Many of those patients came from local nursing homes... our local area being a very rich and affluent suburb of NYC.

The nursing-home residents brought to this small (very well-funded) private hospital were breathing rotting bodies -- most were contracted and stiff (stuck in hideous positions) with bed sores the size of dinner plates on their hips and sacrums.

These were the adults abandoned by their children, and sent to live among strangers who were paid to "care for the elderly".

I used to tell my friends, [before having children, myself], "If I get old, and can't take care of myself, please shoot me dead."

There was nothing worse than seeing and smelling the necrotic rot neglect brought so many elderly people.

All I could think of was this:  These parents must have been hated by their kids.

You know, a government is only as good as it protects it's most vulnerable people.  What does that say about countries that sell their children and let their elderly rot in bed?

 

Fear of the unknown

I guess you could say I am afraid of the unknown I know of stories of women being beaten and raped in jail and I remember how bad it was when I lived in the orphange and how bad it was when I was moved from family to family where I was forced to do slave labor just to be able to eat. I worked so hard to pull myself out of that and now because of this woman I have to go back to all of that again I fear.

Dana

But trust me when I say this

But trust me when I say this having been locked in a cage by government for a large portion of my life.... what does not kill you makes you stronger...

Now... if the worst threat the government has is to send me home (jail) .....

I gotta tell you ... I am just shakin in my booties...

It's really to bad these cowardly government punks won't talk to me face to face... but as we all can see... the fear is no longer mine....but theirs...

Karma is a bitch. Especially when his name is Bizzi.

Pound Pup Legacy