When people who are not adopted and have not taken the time to learn adoption history, or have even current understanding of the different components and complexities in adoption today, speak about adoptees making wild assumptions about why we may fit under the categories dreamed up by non-adopted, i.e. the well-adjusted adoptee, the angry adoptee, the mal-adjusted adoptee, the ambivalent adoptee, the happy adoptee, the…. (kind of makes you think of a line of dolls doesn’t it when you label each adoptee as a certain type)
It never crosses their mind that we (adoptees) have the same ability to break adoption down into different components as any other knowledgable non-adopted person in adoption. Having an opinion on one part of adoption, does not mean that same opinion applies across the board to all components within adoption. (i.e. we can disagree with one part but be perfectly okay with another part)
The other non-scientific means testing done by non-adopted people appears that to fit one of the negative categories dreamed up by non-adopted is that if we have an interest in, or an opinion on adoption and how it is practiced today. I have an interest in rare disease research, animal welfare, environment and follow all those subjects and form opinions on what is being done right or wrong – yet for any of those interests – would you label me one of the negative terms above like you would regarding my interest and opinions in adoption? I do have a rare disease, I do have animals that I adopted from shelters, I do practice being environmentally friendly – so why not slap a negative label on me for those opinions – if you apply a negative label to my adoptee status for the same reason?
Good grief people – think before you label us…and a big thank-you to those who chose not to label us…