Is it harmful to a child's development to be expected to fulfill the desires of their adopters?

Question

In an answer earlier, I regurgitated some information I learned in college - that it's a child's job to explore the world, to learn about textures and colors, cause and effect, etc. I know that as a child who was abused, a lot of my energy that SHOULD have been "spent" on these natural childhood tasks were pulled away to focus on survival. I also learned that my brain grew "wrong" in order to accommodate this unnatural focus. I wonder how it affects a child's development to have to focus on everyone else's needs above their own?

I mean no offense to adopters by this question. I am adopting myself, and I'm trying to understand what the effects will be on my children. Has there been any research done on this?

Answer 1

Wow, I hate that word "adopter."  

To answer your question, what you're referring to is the fight/flight mechanism that sometimes gets hardwired in children that are abused because they constantly live in danger, or fear of danger.  Sometimes this manifests as hyperviligence and gets, IMHO, mistakingly diagnosed as ADHD.  Adreneline, endorphins and other hormones released in the "flight or fight" state are continually realeased. In other words, it is a biological response.

A child being taught to focus on the needs of his/her parents instead of doing what a child is supposed to be doing is certainly not healthy. But I don't know if it causes the hormone releases and biological reactions that a child living with chronic abuse does.  

ETA: After you adopt, are you going to introduce yourself as your child's adopter?  Are you okay with the child introducing you to his/her friends as "my adopter"?

Think about it.  "Birthmother" is also a technically correct term and it's just as insulting.

Answer 2

This is like asking, "Is it harmful to burn an adoptee with a blow torch?"  Uh, DUH!  The thing is, it's harmful to burn ANY child with a blow torch.  The same thing applies here.  Adoptees are no more prone to having to fulfill the dreams of others than any child born into the family.  There are simply some parents who try to mold their children into the lives they themselves would have wanted.  There are some parents who desperately need the child to be this way or that.  Any need that strong will harm any child.  It has nothing to do with blood kinship.  

Answer 3

I think it depends on what you mean by "desires."

A child shouldn't be made to feel like a "cure" for infertility, like they have to be more grateful to their parents than a biological child, like they need to be happy all the time, or like they can never show hurt. They shouldn't be made to follow in the parents' footsteps. They shouldn't have to hide any innate differences they have, or make their personalities always mesh perfectly with those of the adoptive family. I think any of that can be profoundly damaging.

But I also think that loving parents do have desires for their child's wellbeing. They want to heal hurts, and for the child to have a productive future. I don't think a child should feel forced into conformity by that-- there has to be room for honesty-- but I also think that any parent having NO desires for the good of their child borders on indifference and emotional neglect. Parents shouldn't go too far in the other direction and take a "Yeah, whatever" approach to their child's emotional development.

I think it's a fine line that any parents have to walk... but adoptive parents have to more more conscious of it. Showing caring, without pressure. Showing concern without the child feeling like a failure. No parent will do this perfectly, but I think a balance has to be struck with appropriate desires for the child's welfare instead of unreasonable expectations that force conformity and feelings of unworthiness. I think either extreme-- having to live up to the desires of a parent at the expense of the child's own needs, OR parental indifference that doesn't show any desire for healing-- is damaging, and middle ground needs to be found.

Answer 4

I can't say it any better than LittleJaina......DUH!

I would advise you not to expect your future adopted child to fullfull all of your hopes and dreams, Gaia Raain.  It COULD be harmful.

So, let me get this straight.....it's OK for YOU to use words that offends some people but then you and the Terminology n***s get to tell everybody else which words THEY can use that YOU feel are "technically correct"???  You sure think highly of yourself!!

Answer 5

Dear Gaia,

Expectations are a very tricky thing. I believe that there are different kinds of expectations and some are beneficial while others are very harmful and damaging to not only the psyche of the person upon whom they are placed but also on the relationship.

I am a firm believer that most people rise to the (reasonable) social expectations set for them. Things such as decent social decorum, hygiene, minimal literacy, etc. are standard "expectations" for one to function in society. Most of the time, people make an effort to meet these kinds of expectations because it allows them to be accepted by a certain group. People even act differently according to their level of dress. If you notice, most places which enforce a dress code have a higher "standard" of acceptable behavior which increases the stricter the dress code. Schools which require uniforms have fewer infractions than one which do not. You hardly ever hear of a stabbing in a five star restaurant but they happen all the time in fast food places and food courts.)

There are also moralistic or "human" expectations which most parents try hard to instill in their children and expect them to retain and practice throughout their lives. Things like sharing, concern for others, environmental consciousness, honesty, diligence, tolerance, etc. In other words, they expect their children to be GOOD people. I feel that these kinds of expectations are more than reasonable and are beneficial for not only the child but for mankind as a whole. Every person should attempt to live up to these kinds of expectations, IMO.

The bad kinds of expectations are ones that are impossible or unattainable or make another person feel responsible for another person's wellbeing. (I am not talking about things like duty or compassion, they fall into the above paragraph.) These are things like expecting someone to be a certain profession when they grow up or expecting "perfection" in some (or all) area(s).  Expecting a child to fulfill a parent's "dreams" or "be what I never had the chance to" etc. do little more than push the child away. Most children try mightily to live up to parent's expectations and failure is a terrible burden for a child.

I have always felt that my job as a parent is to accept, guide, teach, respect, love and nurture my children to grow into the best people they can be. I see them as their own beings, seperate from myself even though they are of me and I love them with a love greater than myself. I want them to be as happy and healthy as possible. I want them to be positive, responsible and productive members of the planet. I do not feel as though I "own" or "control" my children's lives; I am lucky enough to share them, to be their custodian, guardian, teacher and friend as they begin their journey of life, to support and nurture them and help them along the way and accept them for who THEY are. Above all else I am here to love them - whether or not they meet all of my "expectations".

Great Q. I enjoyed answering it!

Answer 6

I think that a child...adopted or not...should only be expected to fulfill their own dreams and hopes.  You as the parent, are supposed to be there to guide them, teach them, love them, and help them fulfill their dreams.

Answer 7

The children I'm fostering are living proof of what happens to a child's brain when it is focused, as you say, on unnatural aspects such as survival, or the priorities of the parents in their lives.

Like you, I'm incredibly interested in infant and early childhood brain development.  The *fight or flight* response does, I know, create dangerously high levels of hormones in the child's brain and can cause, over time, a kind of erosion to the aspects of the brain that should be focused on conceptual learning and understandings.

My eldest child was in his first home environment the longest.  This meant he was subjected to more prolonged, profound neglect.  At the age of 2.5 years, he demonstrates many symptoms and traits of Autism/ASD.  He self stimulates and self soothes to an incredible extend.  His development in most areas are behind at least 6 months-1 year.  He also has eroded self confidence and self-esteem, and has trouble with exploring natural boundaries.

My middle child experiences similar problems, but on a much smaller scale. She was removed at a younger age, and my youngest child, removed at birth, demonstrates 'perfect' development.

Most of my children's beginnings to life, particularly my son's, was taken up with survival.  He needed to source his own food (taken from the baby), self soothe to an unnatural extent, and needed to worry about what behaviours would 'set off' an unpredictable response from his parents.  He had unnatural and unreasonable expectations placed on him, and a baby was given the responsibility of guessing and living up to the expectations of the adults around him.  I do see the profound impact it has had on him, and may continue to have for many years still to come.  

I fully agree with you, our job as parents, ANY variety of parents, is to be what our children need.  To know them as individuals, talk to them and hear what they have to say, and if need be, modify OUR expectations rather than placing unnatural expectations onto our children.

I don't know how much reading you've done on the latest brain development research, but there's a couple of articles I found really interesting here:

http://www.ipce.info/library_3/files/gla...

http://www.developingchild.harvard.edu/c...