Will Adoption Mean the End of Geneology?

Question

in the near or distant future

Answer 1

Adoption and Geneology kind of negate each other, don't they?

I mean, you can't go around saying blood doesn't matter and then spend all your time searching for your long lost ancestors.  That's just absurd.

Does no one remember that "Facts of Life" episode where Natalie refused to do her Family Tree because she was *gasp* adopted?!!!

I felt the same way.  There was no way I was going to spend hours, days,weeks, months tracing the ancestry of a family that biologically had nothing to do with me.  It's just absurd. What's the point?  And you know what?  My adoptive parents totally understood.  They were good that way.

Answer 2

No I don’t think adoption means the end of genealogy people will still want to look up old kin, there will be some adoptees who will have no problem looking at the genealogy of the family that adoptive them regardless if they are biological related to any of them. There will be adoptees if its that important to them they will seek out biokin.

I guess it just depends on the adoptee  Its never really bothered me. Take for example tonight I was looking at some old family photos, one of my grandmother’s father and his two brothers when they were kids.  Sure these people are not biological related to me but they are still my family, my great grandfather and great uncles and I enjoy looking at old family photos.  As I said before I had no problem doing a family tree in high school of my family, it didn’t matter to me that they aren’t blood, their still my family. My mom even suggest putting birthmothers name and unknown father, but I felt like that would have been a lie. I was doing a family tree and my genetics parents are not family to me. I noted underneath my name the date I was official adopted and the continents  genetic parents were ancestors came from.

Answer 3

Because I do not have the legal human right to know who I am, I did the 21st century thing and took a DNA test. In addition to finding out several other unexpected things about my genetic heritage, I also discovered that the genealogy work my first mother had done for her family needed to be altered. Turns out, someone in our family tree wasn't the offspring of the married parents! Experts say this happens as much as 10% of the time. So, I would say that the opposite will be true: that the number one hobby in the US - genealogy - is going to educate people into pushing for adoption reform. People want to know that the information they have researched is accurate. They don't like being tricked by lies on birth certificates and such.

Answer 4

Yes, if the adoptions are closed and the adopters insist that their adoptees take on their identity.

Hellooo???  GENEology?  Take out the GENE and you have nothing.

Answer 5

Nope.. we will continue to search and seek one another.  Sealed adoption records sure as heck haven't stopped it.

Sealed adoption records have done more for the abortion movement.  Women don't want to spend the rest of their lives never knowing their children.  Talk with a couple of nmothers and you will find that out.

Answer 6

I agree with everything Gershom wrote.  

Adoption won't end genealogy, except, of course, for adoptees unable to trace their natural families because of SEALED RECORDS.  Add to the mix the number of children conceived through IVF using donor eggs, sperm, & embryos, and surrogacy, and there will be a whole new wave of ADULTS unable to access their heritage.  

But hey, it shouldn't matter to us anyway, right?  Just because so many people are interested in studying their family genealogies doesn't mean we have the right to study ours.

Answer 7

excuse me, your question is now another reason some people may opt for abortion over adoption- and by the way, my 2 children are adopted and when they did their family tree in school- they are apart of the family tree- sorry, an adopted child has just as much rights to a family as biological children do. And they are obviously wanted or the adopted family would not search out a child.  Next time do research before you give a bad name to giving life to your child.-

Answer 8

Why would it?  It just makes it richer, more complex, that's all!

Answer 9

If a child is truly adopted into a family, then ALL of that family becomes the child's own.  If an adoptee chooses not to accept their entire family, that's the adoptees own problem - no one elses.  

My brothers both did family trees in school.  It didn't bother either of them.  In fact, one of them is so proud of some of our distant relatives that it's almost an obsession with him!  Why on earth would his being adopted make him any less part of our family?  

Adoption has been around since the dawn of time.  In Egypt, people even adopted other ADULTS to make sure a dynasty was continued.  If they didn't believe those adoptions made the adopted person part of the family, then it wouldn't have continued the dynasty.  

Also, I believe that tracing geneologies has less to do with the actual question of "Where I come from" than it does with feeling connected to the world today and the world of yesterday.  I know that I've studied my own geneology in the past, and in all honesty, as soon as you get to the point where the names belong to people that no one alive even remembers, the names themselves truly mean nothing.

There are two truly interesting things in geneology.  The first is how families intertwine.  It's the idea that thousands and thousands of people had to come together to make the family that you see as your own today.  If just one of those links hadn't happened, the whole thing would have collapsed.  Then, at the same time, if you take a single point/person in this house of cards that made your family, you see that that person also contributed to dozens, of other families that you've never even met.  It's just cool to realize how individual human interactions effect so many people.  

The second really cool thing about geneology is because it's a history lesson of the "common man".  Very few of our ancestors were really kings, or queens, or emporers, or even generals or ship captains.  Most of them were every day Joe's just like us.  Studying geneology leads to imagining the lives of the common man back for generations.  It lets you see how REAL people were effected by the big movements in history.  It makes you wonder how things you do will ripple on down through the generations, and what impact decisions our politicians will have on the children two hundred years from now.  

None of these things is impeded by adoption.  In adoption one of two things can happen.  Either the adoptee knows the names and histories of the biological parents, or the adoptee does not.  If the adoptee does not know the names and histories of the biological parent, then he/she can be equally blessed by tracing the herritage of his/her adoptive family.  After all, the life he/she is living would not have been possible without all the same connections.  He/She would not be the same person if he/she had been raised in a different family.  If the adoptee DOES know the names and histories of the biological parents then he/she can have two sets of family trees to trace back.  As someone has already mentioned, this can be very enriching.  That is exponentially more connections to explore and marvel at.  Just imagine if there was another traceable adoption of one of the parents!  You'd end up with so many connections that you'd never get bored!  

In short, adoption does nothing to hamper the true benefits of researching geneology and can, in fact, enhance it!

Answer 10

I don't know that it will end genealogy, but it makes it more difficult for many adopted persons.  I feel really bad for those who are the product of sperm and egg donors.  They are strictly produced to fulfill the desires and needs of the parents.  How they feel about it is irrelevant.  It's not like there was a child in need that was up for adoption.

Now, genealogy is just that -- tracing the GENES passing through a line.  It is people of the same blood.  Adopted persons are often added into a family tree, but if it's a true genealogical pedigree, then adopted family members are marked as such.  This is not done because they "don't really count" as family members, it's done because genealogy is about the GENES and BLOODLINES.  

I've thoroughly enjoyed the genealogical research in my natural family.  We're related to some interesting folks!  

None of this makes my adoptive family any less my family, as well.  But, genealogy is about bloodlines.

EDIT:

My adoptive parents weren't the least bit offended that I wouldn't be doing a genealogical tree in school.  It didn't make sense to them to pretend, either.  I didn't feel I was any less their daughter because of it.

Answer 11

It has definately been a major part in ending the ability to trace your ancestry via your birth certificates. I realize not all mothers have been honest with their children about their fathers at birth, but that lies in an ethical responsibility of the mother, and that is a responsibility that should be obvious to ANY mother.

I'm talking about the responsibility of the states and country to uphold a persons ancestry and not discriminate against ones ancestry intentionally. Amended birth certificates have done just that. they have cut off our geneology and ancestry intentionally and sealed the truth away in some secret somewhere I can only imagine.  

Not only that but another generation of complete end of geneology has emerged itself and an end must be stopped to this as well. Donor Conceived people are being discriminated against in a MAJOR way. They can have 2 parents who aren't related to them by DNA but since the egg and sperm were "purchased" BEFORE pregnancy and then implanted in the adoptive mothers uterus the birth certificate lists parents that aren't biologically related to the Donor Conceived individual.  Ethically speaking, this is just WRONG.

our world is getting way to carried away in fullfilling the wants of humans and walking all over the rights of children in the process. When a child is involved their rights must come first, above and beyond everyone elses. Potential adoptive parents, surrendering parents, donor concieved parents, surrogate parents, foster parents, all need to come second to the child in question and then our geneology amoung other things would be restored.

Answer 12

Interesting Question!  As my own mother is working on our genealogy for the family, including tracing my son's birth family for his portion of the "family tree", this question really struck a chord with me.

Genealogy in itself is difficult.  Genealogy in a situation of adoption is extremely difficult, especially if the records are sealed (obviously).  

However, I think that the adoption reform all of you are pushing for with access to open records actually will help with keeping genealogy alive.  Isn't that what genealogy is all about - tracing one's heritage?  I believe that the reform you are pushing for will only help to keep genealogy alive, rather than be the end of it.

As a sidenote, when we do our son's family tree, we use our family as the branches, but we do his bio family as the "roots".  They are the "roots" to his heritage and therefore should be included on his family tree.  Sure his tree looks a little different, but the reality is that it shows how many people love this child - and that warms my heart (as I'm sure it will warm his when he is older).

Answer 13

It has certainly ended mine.  My birth certificate says two infertile people gave birth to me.