For all of you 'accused' angry adoptees?

Question

Do you acknowledge at all that adoption can be a good thing?

(I'm really asking this, not baiting or any of those other terms I've seen lately.)

Answer 1

I am not at all angry with my adoption. At the end of the day, my birth mother made a choice that was right for her at the time, and it has turned out to be a great decision that has effected me in the most positive way yet.

If i never got the chance to trace my birth family, then it wouldnt have been the end of the world for me! I have a loving mum and dad, and 2 wonderfull kids of my own. I would have been a bit put out, but I wont let who I USED to be, ruin my life. Whats the point in that?

I speak for the adoptees who have had a normal straight forward adoption. I am not sure of everyone elses adoption so i cant comment on that. I am gratefull to my parents (which i should be, and will stand by that belief) as I wouldnt have the life I have if it wasnt for them.

I DONT have issus with my adoption like one person on here is claiming everyone has some issues. It is not the case and that person has no proof of adoptees having issues. The issues are there because people let them be.

My opinions and my thaughts

Answer 2

adoption can be good. but their are people who shouldn't adopt just like some bio-parents shouldn't have kids.

try acknowledging that

Answer 3

Yes of course it can, when it is absolutely necessary

Answer 4

Answering the subquestion:

There are two different organizations that are tracking ethics and accountability with regards to adoption.  Whether or not it meets your standard of criteria is up to you, but these are the two most linked to groups when it comes to that topic.  (since you asked, otherwise I would stay out of a question pointed towards adoptees.)

Ethica

http://www.ethicanet.org/itemlist.php?pa...

Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute

http://www.adoptioninstitute.org/index.p...

Answer 5

Of course adoption can be a good thing. Who would actually want a child to live in foster care or be a victim of abuse? Fortunately these cases are not the norm.  Neither are the cases of women who make an adoption plan totally on their own, nor the cases of adoptees who walk away with no issues at all.

When done in an ethical way with the child's best interest in the forefront adoption can be the best choice. The sad reality is that most adoptions are neither ethical nor set in motion with the child's best interest at heart.

***edit

There is very little "evidence" of how tainted the adoption industry is, there are however countless personal stories. The adoption industry works hard to keep the darker side under wraps. Imagine how it would harm a business to have that sort of thing leaked out!

Answer 6

Mostly.

I know alot of people who were adopted out of bad situations.

When they cant take care of a kid, i mean at least they had the child.

Answer 7

I think its a great thing, better then killing off babies that never had a chance and it wasnt there fault, or where the parents were incapable of takin care of correctively... I think if you raise a child that has been adopted and be truthful with them from the beginning then things will be fine... and they will respect you and respect the fact that they are adobted, I would pick adoption over abortion

Answer 8

I was 17 and still in high school. It was the best choice for my little girl. I chose her parents and had them in the delivery room so that they would feel that they were included in her birth. I think it was beautiful. For the past 12 years, I've dreamed of the day that a lovely young lady is standing at my door wanting to meet her birthmother. I have no doubt that she is loved as I love her. I would be absolutely devastated if she were angry at me for wanting to give her to a capable and loving family.

Answer 9

I'm an adoptee, and I consider adoption a wonderful thing. I respect the choice that my biological mother made 37 years ago. She did what she felt was best for me. How could I be angry at her? I don't know her or the circumstances she was dealing with at the time, so I cannot judge or resent her. She could have aborted me, after all. I would love to meet her one day, though.

I love my adoptive parents. I consider them my "real" parents. I am definitely not an "angry adoptee."

Answer 10

for some people having there children adopted is the only option for them.  They are putting there child into what they hope will be a better life.  My sister was adopted at birth and I was unaware of her till I was in my 40's.  She has had a great life but she always felt something was missing.

Answer 11

i m adopted person :(

Answer 12

Adoption can be a good thing if it is done right and ethically.  

Just google Allison Quets, Stephanie Bennett, Ibaanika Bond, Jamie Kiefer, Cody O'Dea, Rashad Head, Shawn McDonald, Joshua Simmerson, and Bryn Ayre.  That is just the tip of the iceberg.  There are many other cases that have gag orders on them.

Answer 13

I think I'm going to draw a distinction that some may not like, but I don't know how else to answer the question.

Can being placed for adoption be better than not?  Yes.  If the first parents are neglectful, for instance, and the adoptive parents are good parents, then being adopted might be better for the child than leaving him or her with the original parents.  

Having said that, my claim is and has been that adoption is always predicated on loss.  The child has lost his or her original parents.  That is always a bad thing.  (Either the original parents loved and cared for the child or they didn't.  If they did, then it's a loss that they could not or did not keep the child.  If they didn't, then the child suffers a loss simply from not being cared for by the original parents.)  I'm not talking about how the child feels (though many do feel a loss).  I'm talking about objectively the child losing something that, ideally, he or she would have, namely the love and care of the original parents.  Adoption may be a replacement for that love and care, but it is not identical to it.

As I've said many times, adoption may be necessary in some cases.  But even in those cases, the child has suffered a tragic loss.  Until we, as a society, recognize that loss, we cannot properly help adoptees, adoptive parents, or first parents.  

I had a good adoption experience, as far as adoption experiences go.  But the loss that necessitated adoption caused me confusion and pain.  

I hope I've been clear here.  I really want to explain my position on this, not be bitter or angry.  I love my adoptive parents and my first mom.  I don't have to choose among them, nor do I have to be okay with adoption as such to love and respect them and their choices.

Edited to Add:  I know I don't speak for all adoptees, but I want say something people might not realize.  My wife was surprised, six years into our relationship, to discover that I had some serious issues with adoption.  Indeed, if anyone had asked me, even people that knew me well, I probably wouldn't have said anything.  It has been my experience that many adoptees don't express any negative feelings they may have about adoption, or if they do, they usually start by talking to other adoptees first.  It has only been recently that I've found my own voice on this issue.

Answer 14

I use to be one of those 'angry' adoptees, lol...why, because I felt abandoned. I was not one of those babes adopted at birth. I was supposedly cared for my birth family or relatives or somebody for the 1st year of my life then left behind a train station in which somebody took me to an orphanage till I was 5 years old.  They do say that whoever left me put a name tag on me with my birthdate so in a way I feel that shows me that who ever left me cared & expected me to be found...it took me until 2 years ago to realize that.

I hated anybody that remotely resembled me as I was not born in the US. I had a lot of hate...now that I had my daughter I realize that it's not like they just tossed me to side...it couldn't have been that easy for the person who had to decide.  I am grateful for being adopted now because if I hadn't I would most likely be working some low-income job probably being a prostitute or a stripper who knows where.

Was my adopted family perfect...by all means h**l no. I could not stand my mom until a few years ago.  We had the same problems as any family would have & I had two adopted brothers (not blood related but none the less my 'real brothers') and they never seemed to have as many issues as I did with the adoption thing.

I guess my point is I have come to realize that being adopted made a difference, for the best.

Answer 15

it is so much better to put a child up for adoption than negect or abuse them

Answer 16

Sure it can be a good thing.

I have a very nice life.  I love my adoptive family.

The thing is, it is very startling to learn as an adult that everything I thought I knew was a lie.

My mother was coerced.  My aparents were lied to and the adoption agency collected money off of me for my "support" as their ward even though they had placed me with my adoptive parents who paid for everything.

I believe that closed records allowed this to happen.  The agency was not held accountable because they thought that with everything being "sealed" no one would ever find out what they did or how they treated all of my parents and me.

Closed records = no accountability and that is very scary when it is children's lives on the line.

I think people need to be careful when placing or adopting.  I think they need to hold the industry to a higher standard.  I think they should demand that adoptions, all adoptions be safe and ethical.

I am not anti-adoption at all.  But the industry needs a tremendous amount of reform.

Answer 17

Adoption isn't easy for anyone. I remember growing up with many questions about my history and my past. It worked out that my mother wanted to see me and my father didn't. Such is life. We should all be great full to have parents adopted or not. I know 2 people whose parents died before their time, yet I have two sets. Lets not be bitter. Lets be grateful for what we've been given.

Answer 18

I know I've stated so many times that what I'm angry about is not adoption in and of itself.  I am not "against" adoption.  It is always better than being abused/neglected or living one's childhood in the foster system.  I was adopted out of foster care and I'm very glad for it.  It would be best if, in such circumstances, appropriate family members were the ones who adopted these children, but even that, I realize, is not always an available option.  Phil also points out that underlying all adoption is loss that should not be denied, even though it's unavoidable in situations where children cannot be raised by their parents.

What I don't like are some of the various practices and laws surrounding adoption.  It seems that no matter how many times I make this statement, a few folks have trouble separating the two.   Perhaps I am not clarifying the distinction well enough.  

There are two items that bother me the most.  One is that adoption was always meant as a way to find permanent homes for children without families, but it is now practiced more as a method of finding children for families that want children.  This moves the main focus in adoption away from the child.  The other is that in 44 of our 50 states, adopted citizens are the only citizens in the society who are denied unconditional access to their owns birth records.  I shall expand.

The first adoption legislation occurred in 1851 in Massachusetts.  All parties had to provide written consent to the adoption, including the child to be adopted if 14 or more years old.  Only the court was involved.  The were no private agencies or state social service agencies involved.  Birth records were not sealed.

In 1917, Minnesota passed adoption statute that included sealing the original birth record from the public only.  All "parties of interest" to the adoption had complete access, including the adoptive parents, the natural parents and the adopted persons.  Adoptive parents felt more secure knowing that their child's adoptive status would not be publicly known.  However, keeping records secret from everyone, including the adopted person, is a phenomenon that took off after WW2.  The adopted person might at some point, after all, let the cat out of the bag that s/he was adopted.  A great stigma surrounded adoption and infertility, so adoptive parents wanted the option to keep the adoption a secret from the adopted child.   Ironically, the idea of keeping a natural parent's identity anonymous from the adopted person was never a consideration in any of this legislation, yet it is the excuse used today by people who wish to deny adopted persons the same rights as their non-adopted counterparts.  

By the 1970's, adopted persons who lived in states that had sealed their birth records from them began to work for reform that would repeal such legislation.  All but two states, Kansas and Alaska, were sealing records from adopted persons.  However, since the late 1990's, four states have changed their laws and once again allow unconditional access to adopted citizens to their birth records.  These are Maine, New Hampshire, Oregon and Alabama.

The sealing of records did not mean that records would seal when parents relinquished their children.  They do not. The birth records only seal if and when an adoption is finalized.  If an adoption fails and the child is "unadopted," the original birth record unseals and is reinstated as the child's only legal birth certificate.  All of the children sitting in foster care who age out of the system have complete access to their original birth certificates, as these are their only legal birth certificates.  This is true whether the child was removed by CPS or whether the parent(s) relinquished without the court forcing their hands.  This alone shows that their is no anonymity of identity guaranteed to natural parents.  But there is more.  Some states allow the adoptive parents or adoptee (if old enough to state) to decide whether or not the original birth record will be sealed.  In the 44 states that currently deny adopted citizens their own birth records, provisions are made for such access to occur if certain conditions are met.   In some states, such as Tennessee, the condition to be met is that the natural parent(s) have not filed a form denying the adopted person access.  In other states, such as California, the condition to be met is obtaining a court order to access the records.  It is clear that there is no real provision for natural parents to have their identity's kept secret from adopted persons.  

Despite all of this, there are still 44 states that discriminate against adopted citizens by making them the only citizens in our society who do not have the right to unfettered access to their very own birth records.

So, adoption in and of itself isn't what angers me.  The laws and practices that discriminate against adopted citizens and that have made adoption much more a method of finding children for families rather than simply finding families for children, are what anger me.

Answer 19

For me, adoption isn't the issue.  It's the way being adopted messes with your head that's the problem.  Of course, obviously adoption is necessary sometimes.  In my case, I have no issues with who adopted me, nor am I angry with my first mom.  I have a fine family and have been well provided for and I know that my first mom was doing the best thing she could do given the circumstances she was in.

I just answered your other question asking what is the "loss" feeling we adoptees talk about.  If you read that and still don't understand what I'm talking about when I say "messes with your head", then you just don't want to get it.

ETA:  Since you took down your other question, here is my answer to you asking  "Can anyone tell me about this 'loss' feeling concerning adoption?"

My answer:

"The way you feel about your baby [not wanting to raise him/her] is exactly the reason why it hurts so very, very much to be adopted.

Knowing, day in, day out, that your own mother...the very person who is supposed to love you more than anyone else in the world...didn't want you. There is absolutely no words to describe how incredibly, exquisitely painful that feeling is.

The loss? How about the loss of feeling wanted, the loss of what every other person that isn't adopted has...their own mother's love. I've gone through life wondering, why? What was wrong with me? Why didn't she keep me?

Yeah, yeah. I was told that old line that "you're mother loved you and wanted you to have a better life than she could give you." That made so much sense to me...NOT!

Why would she give me away if she loved me? WHY?! You see, a baby is not an adult. A baby doesn't understand that maybe their mother didn't actually want to be a mother and that it would be better off with someone who does want to be a mother. That's logic...babies aren't logical, they can't even talk for chrissake. They can only feel. And what they feel is that their mother didn't want them. Period. And that hurts. A lot."

I'm really sorry that you took that question down because it was a really good question and there were some really good answers.