Question for birthmothers...?

Question

Sorry if I'm being a bother, but as an adoptee I was just curious. A lot of us adoptees started out as baby boy/baby girl *last name*, but some were named by their birth parents then had their name changed when adopted. As a birthmother, did you name your child, and if you didn't does that mean that you don't want to know anything about them? Have any of you named your child without actually putting it on records anywhere? I'm mainly wondering if "baby girl/baby boy" is a giant no reunion sign, or not. Thanks

Answer 1

Baby girl/baby boy are definitely NOT a 'no reunion' sign.  Some mothers didn't have the chance to name their baby.

Some mothers were given the opportunity to fill out registration papers for their child and therefore pick out a name for them, but some had their babies hustled out of the room without even knowing if ithey had a boy or a girl.  So they didn't have a chance to name their child except in their own mind.

I named my son and he was quite happy to hear his first names - Keith Martin - when we reunited... and learn why I chose those names.

So... my answer is "no", it is not a giant no reunion sign!

Answer 2

Honey you are no bother at all, if you need to ask questions like yours you do it and as for changing names, well I had one bilogical child a girl and she was getting a little older and wanted a brother or sister and so I kept foster children all the time so I had good access to a lot of children and gave them shelter and food and most of all the love that they didn't get at home, I took these children on vacation out of state places they had never thought of being and they were very happy and some of them went back home to their mom's and some were adopted and of course people ask me all the time how can you give them up after keeping them for awhile and my answer to them was I was in it for the children and to see the joy and happiness as they got to do things that they had never done before and go to the mall and different things like that is is worth me hurting just to help them, sure I missed them but I did show them love and took them to church and ask God to watch over them where ever they went.  Well and as far as adoption I did adopt 2 beautiful girls they were 4 and 6 and I have 3 girls now my biological daghter is 32 and one I adopted is 21 and the other is 23 and they are the most important people in my life alone with my 3 grandchildren from the oldest child, and I kept their first names that they had I thought about it and they were just  too old to try to change their names because they were already use to them and I did change their middle name and gave them my last name and they are very happy girls and they love me as tho I was their biological mother.  They have never said anything at all about their mother but they do have siblins that we are gonna try to find. I hope I haven't confused you and hope for the best for you so take care and Happy Easter!!!!!!!!!

Answer 3

It's not a sign at all.  

It's whatever the maternity home/agency told these mothers to do.  Probably depends on the state, too.  My mother wanted to name me one name, say Stephanie, but the Crittendon Home employees told her to 'save' that name for her future daughter, (that she never had) the one she would keep.  So she named me after her sisters--first & middle names.

I know a lot of adoptees who have their natural father's listed on the original birth certificate, but for me there is none.  My parents were boyfriend/girlfriend for over 10 yrs.  So it's not like she didn't know who he was.  She was told to leave the space blank for whatever reason.

I think women who are giving children up for adoption are not in a place of empowerment or choice--they do what they're told--whatever is done at the time, or place of the birth.

You might want to read 'The Girls who Went Away' by Ann Fessler.  A lot would be explained for you in that book.  Your library probably has a copy.

Good luck with your search!