RSS

Daily Archives: March 12, 2011

Adoption does not cause this…

I started this post back in February but could not find the words to explain why I felt the need to talk about this.  Von posted about this topic this week in a post about traumatized adoptees with a link in it and it brought me back to this draft post to try to finish it…and because of this try to read this based on context vs specific words or sentences…
While there are parts of the links Von posted that I agree with, what I want to talk about is what I see happening to the mindsets in adoption and the blame game.  The words used seem to be creating a division between the trauma an adoptee may feel and the actual act of adoption, a denial in a sense.  I am still having trouble with my words  and feelings in describing the gut reaction I have when seeing this deliberate move to disassociate the act of adoption from the trauma that may be felt.  A move to assign the blame to the family of origin and make it all hearts and roses on the family adopting…perhaps it is the old demons vs angels complex…
This gut feeling of the move to separate adoption from the trauma an adoptee may have started when I was reading one of the many studies on adoption and of course the finding was that the majority of adoptees are just fine…and that ‘adoption’ does not cause the issues…
I have also read many statements that the abandonment, relinquishment, whatever term used, is what causes the issues and that the adoption does not.  That adoption rescues the adoptee and saves the adoptee…
I have also been told quite a bit lately that surrender, relinquishment, termination of parental rights is completely separate from the act of adoption. 
I disagree with all of the above.  Why?
I was surrendered for adoptionA family was found for meThe family petitioned to adopt me. 
I was the one common factor in all three steps and none of the steps would be required without me or would have happened without the other steps happening.  That links all three parts into one-act…me being adopted.
I wasn’t simply surrendered to be surrendered existing somewhere in la la land, I was surrendered for adoption.
They (the state) did not go looking for a family for a non-existent baby, they went looking for a family for a specific reason, me.
The family they found did not petition to adopt a non-existent baby, they petitioned for a specific baby, me.
Domestic adoption exists because a parent(s) surrender their baby to be adopted.  Domestic adoption exists because people want to be parents.  Supply and demand go hand in hand in creating an adoptee…you are not an adoptee until the act of adoption makes you so.  If they knew they could not have found a family for me do you honestly think that the state or agency etc would ever allow a baby to be surrendered to them when there is no fear of abuse or future abuse?  Or that a mother would willingly surrender without the promise that a family would be found or had already been found for the baby?  Do you really think that would happen?  I don’t and if it did it would be exceedingly rare and we would definitely not number in the millions like we do…especially today when so many adopting parents are in the delivery room already matched to adopt the baby…  
Why would anyone not see that adoption has many parts and participants but is one act to the domestic adoptee?  (note I am sure some adoptee out there will disagree but these are my feelings) 
Regardless if it makes parents feel better to blame the ‘trauma’ an adoptee may feel on the surrendering side, you really  have to answer the question that without the receiving side would there be the surrendering side? 
It’s kind of like what came first the chicken or the egg…or blaming a car accident on the fact that you bought the car…
Advertisements
 
10 Comments

Posted by on March 12, 2011 in Adoption

 

Tags: , ,