Is "The Primal Wound" absolute nonsense?

Question

I recently plowed through this turgid work and thought it was total c**p and that the author needs a lot of counseling help. Yet, many people who seem to have their heads on straight rave about it. What am I missing here?

Answer 1

Well, I don't know how to respond to your criticism, as it doesn't explain what you found wrong with it.

But no, it's not complete nonsense.  Nancy Verrier is an Adoptive Mother who, because of her experiences with her daughter, engaged in additional research on the traumas suffered by adoptees.  She neither speaks for all adoptees, nor does she rail against adoption.  She is trying to provide an honest view of the problems that can be faced by adoptive parents and their children and makes recommendations on how to prepare for them.

Not everything resonated with me.  But more of it resonated than I expected it to.  (I expected, when I picked up the book, not to like it.  It sounded a bit much for me.  I was, however, pleasantly surprised.)

I think those critiquing the book who haven't read it (and this applies to everything in life) shouldn't.  If you haven't read the book, then you are not in a position to speak about it.  

As for the original poster's criticism, there are no specific criticisms to respond to.  It's simply ad hominem, so no reasoned criticism to agree with or disagree with.

To answer your question:  No.  It's not absolute nonsense.  As to what you are missing, it's hard to know, since you simply dismiss the book and engage in name-calling.

Answer 2

I understood some of it, but then again i was adopted at 4 years old, so i would of felt that seperation of mother and child a little bit more than a baby. Not all of it i agreed with, but some of it.

Answer 3

yes

Answer 4

I think Verrier simply tries to perpetuate the myth that adoptees are damaged.  since she's an AP, she couldn't possibly believe that kids will be kids or that it could be her parenting so it's just much better to blame it on something else -- Adoption!  why not, right?  it's a crutch for so many to blame their life's ills on and Verrier seeks to keep that myth alive and well.

EDIT:  they rave about it because, as i said above, it's their crutch. it's their reason for all their ills.  It takes the responsibility away from them and puts it on someone else.

Answer 5

I plowed through it too.  It was not an enjoyable read for me.

The worst part though was learning that many adoptees were drugged in the seventies to keep them from crying for their mothers.  I thought that was so horrible, I had to put the book down.

And then I went to my own adoption file and pulled out a letter my foster mother had sent with me when my aparents picked me up.  At the end it said, "I am sending her pills with her.  Give them to her when she cries...I haven't had to use them in a couple of weeks."

And I realized that I had been drugged as a baby too (I was born in the early seventies).  It was very disturbing to figure this out.

I read the rest of the book and I see a lot of validity to it, especially in the context of who I am.

This book is not a get out of jail free card by any  means.  I don't use it to defend who I am as a person.  And I have worked hard my entire life to overcome the trauma I experienced in my relinquishment and the three months I was drugged in foster care.

The thing is, babies experience loss when they are relinquished and often they (in their infant brains) see that loss as abandonment.  People need to know that so that they can truly make an informed decision when relinquishing a child or adopting a child.

The Primal Wound may help an adoptive parent understand why it might not be such a good idea to let an adopted baby "cry it out" as it may not help them to overcome their trauma of abandonment but reinforce it.  

The Primal Wound is by no means an all encompassing work and it does not speak for all adopted people but it should be acknowledged as a valuable reference for all members of adoption.

ETA: Primal Wound speaks more to infant adoption than older child adoption.  Perhaps that is why you did not see it's value in relation to your own experiences.

Answer 6

The book makes several good points in regards to abuse and neglect. These life events truly do change a person forever. However, the author writes a bit too "dreamy" and dramatized for me. He seems to be trying for dramatic effect instead of informing. The book is a bit simplistic at best.

It's not the worst piece of work I've ever read, but certainly not the best.

Answer 7

shelly, why are you even answering?????

i actually loved the book.  for once, someone wrote what i felt.

Answer 8

YOU may not have gotten anything from the book, but if others do isn't that okay too?

Their life experiences are different from yours and therefore the book may have resonated more with them than you.  If things in the book validates anothers feelings, who are we to judge.

Answer 9

This is terribly funny.  Do you know what turgid means?  It means when a man gets...uh..."happy"...the resulting..er..."stiffness"... that's turgid.

I haven't read the book yet, but I have read her website, and other writings, studies, seen films, etc. that support her position.  I'm looking forward to reading this book.  It doesn't have to resonate with you in order for it to not be a waste of paper.  Offer it up on paperbackswap (if you own it, that is), because I guarantee it will resonate with someone else.

(giggles...turgid...that's awesome)

ETA:  I have to laugh at myself.  I must have been reading out of an old dictionary or something, because the first time I looked it up, that IS the definition I read.  (BTW, I looked it up after reading a Dave Barry book in which the phrase "turgid manfullness" is used to describe a risque situation.)  But after your comment, I had to go look it up again, just to be sure.  The definitions I find online are twofold:

1. swollen; distended; tumid.  

2. inflated, overblown, or pompous; bombastic: turgid language.  

So, pardon me whilst I go wipe this egg off my face.  Hey, it's all good.  Anything to make me laugh!  (And btw, I do NOT mind being laughed at, especially if I make an a$$ out of myself!)

Answer 10

I have no idea what you are missing....I've read it and it makes a lot of sense for those who feel it though.

Answer 11

Made alot of sense to me

You can think whatever you like but I don't feel the way you do about it - a fascinating read that has helped lots of people

Her follow up book, aimed at adopted adults was really helpful to me too

Try the Secret Life of the Unborn Child and the Continuum Concept next and see how dismissive you can be of those

Have a  good day!

Answer 12

I haven't read it, but I am very suspicious of alot of psychology stuff, and I have to admit, from what I've heard, the primal wound sounds kind of over-the-top.. I'm hesitant to consider it a balanced, really true piece of work.. But as I said, I haven't read it.. as a PAP, I probably should, and give it a fair shot, but I doubt I'll agree with it..Just because I don't agree with all this psychology-trying-to-follow-your problems back to a "childhood cause." I think this kind of thinking was started by "psychologists" who just wanted someone else to blame (parents) for THEIR  mental s***w-ups.

I think anytime a baby is separated from it's mother it suffers a certain amount of what CAN be called "Trauma" BUT I believe in the resilience of babies, and the adaptability of the young and I really would not believe that it is something they "never get over it" (for lack of a better way to put it) meaning ALL of them.. I'm sure there are some that don't, what I'm saying is I refuse to believe that ALL are "scarred for life" (sounds like a "wound" huh?)  So anyway... I'm not an adoptee, so I don't intend to speak for them, but I've heard some adoptees say that they are well-adjusted and don't feel as though they have a primal wound or were "traumatized" (Because they've forgotten the BRIEF trauma that they DID momentarily suffer when separated from their b-mom) I got my tonsils out when I was 5.. I'm sure the hospital stay and everything else I went though was traumatic for me at that age.. but you know what? 22 years later, I don't remember or feel the trauma at ALL.. I vaguely remember the experience.. actually the only things I remember is being asked to breathe into a mask and promptly falling asleep, and being given a YUMMY green Popsicle afterward ... BIRTH is traumatic for a baby.. but do you think it stays scarred in it's "inner psyche" for life? I don't..

It's not because I'm a PAP that I don't believe in all this stuff.. it's just like all the books these quack "modern baby experts" put out saying that letting your baby "cry it out" instead of giving into it's demands, or spanking your child, scars them for life.. I have every reason to refuse to believe it, because my mother did both, and she's the best in the world and ended up with VERY well-balanced, well-behaved children who are EXTREMELY attached to her and love her to death..

Anyway, that's my 2 cents.. as a PAP, I WILL read "The Primal Wound" and try to have an open mind when I do, and take from it what I can, even if I don't agree with all of it

Answer 13

This is the adoption police.  A citation for judging others is being issued.  In the future, please refrain from referring to others in a derogatory manner.  Not understanding something is no excuse to simply say that the those who do relate must be somehow wrong or improperly dependent.

Answer 14

Hello Evan

You are entitled to dislike the book and also to ask what others see in it. The fact that you are criticized for even asking the question is to be expected, though.

Isn't it amazing how many answers include "I haven't read the book but..."? You asked a legitimate question and got some varied, occasionally shrill, occasionally defensive, answers. You also got some very good answers and I hope you can sort them out.

Your use of the word "turgid" is correct in this case and it is not the finest response of the simpering and illiterate answer that one writer gave to you. The book is bombastic, pretentious, and overblown. By reading it, I found out that one of my biological children was suffering from post-orphanage attachment disorder or some such nonsense.

Verrier is representative of the "you don't agree with me, you must be crazy" school of parenting. If by your reading you can learn to recognize that style, your time plowing through it is well spent.

There are a lot of people who take great comfort in Verrier's message. Maybe that is enough.

Good question -

Answer 15

Define "c**p."  What 3-5 criteria did you use to arrive at your conclusion?  Ad hom. attacks on the author are not an argument.  Specific examples needed.  Counterarguments from authorities in psychology, neonatology, adoption literature would help.  

Grade:  Charity D.

Answer 16

No.  

I didn't relate to all of it, but much of it resonated with me.  However, I am an adopted person--you don't say how or if you're involved with adoption.

Sometimes it's hard to relate to something you have not lived. I am not an alcoholic, so I wouldn't dream of criticizing theories and concepts written about this condition.  

I find it hard to believe that most adoptees could read The Primal Wound and not relate to it at all. It is my belief that like alcoholics, we adoptees have more in common emotionally than not.

It is my hope that you are not a PAP, like the other poster here.  Because if you believe the book is 'total c**p', you're really not AP material.  Your lack of empathy and sensitivity about what it's like to grow up adopted would eliminate you in my book.

Answer 17

I personally have not read this book yet.  My local library is getting it through inter-library links for me and it hasn't come in yet.  

You tell us that "Yet, many people who seem to have their heads on straight rave about it."

Perhaps you should try reading it again!!  Also you give no specifics as to why you think it was "total c**p".  

Perhaps you'd be interested in another book:  :Being Adopted The Lifelong Search for Self by Brodzinsky, Schechter, & Henig.  

If you follow links that people in this section put out for us and read some of the reading material that is suggested more of what you are hearing on this forum and "The Primal Wound" may show you what your missing.  

But then again you don't really tell us what your looking for so how can anyone help you find what your missing.

Answer 18

I'm an adoptee who read the book and felt like it was meant for someone else. It didn't speak to me at all. But that's what is so great about books - I am certain it did speak to other people, and as long as they don't insist that it applies to my life I certainly won't insist that it's irrelevant to their experience.