From The Ridiculous To The Sublime

It is getting to the point where some of the comments I have received are going past the line of weird and into the realm of hilarious. I actively blog against the institution of adoption, and especially, the crimes against Senior Mothers from the *BSE and I am now receiving ominous, anonymous warnings against what someone perceives to be my "hate" postings. I have read many a blog on this big old Internet, and, when it comes to being "hateful," I am small taters, folks. Hey, go to some of the angry adoptee or adopter sites and read about us. Now THAT's hate!

I also get a put-down, now and then, by some self-appointed mental giant who states that, if I don't publish comments that are in opposition to my viewpoint, that I won't be taken seriously. Well, gee, that IS a worry, but I think I'll take my chances. I have stated, many times, and will state again, that it is not my responsibility to provide a debate forum on the rights or wrongs of adoption. Some people are "fer it,"....I'm "agin it." That's my right and the right of all the other mothers and adopted people who think like I do.

I find it confusing that speaking frankly and honestly can be seen as "hateful," yet labeling Mothers with the "b" word and pre-judging an expectant mother as probably a future abuser and neglecter isn't seen as intolerant and just plain wrong. There are blogs on the Internet where "good Christians" spew hatred towards gays, Muslims, Democrats and, yes, single mothers. I am not too worried that the blog police are going to be coming after me for being opinionated.

The thought police seem to be having a problem. Some people have wandered away from the PC view that adoption is soooo sweet, warm, fuzzy and just wunnnerful and have started seeing the damage done to the mothers and the children. Foreign governments are starting to notice that some less-than-savory characters are marketing the infants and toddlers of their country. It is also being noticed that those who adopt are as likely to divorce, become alcoholic or addicted, molest, abuse and even murder as anyone else. Agencies, here and there, in our own country are having licenses yanked and probationary measures taken against them.

In spite of the big guns behind the AAC and the NCFA, word is getting out about how mothers are being taken in by adoption propaganda and how "open" adoption is worth about the same as a $3 bill. The suicide of one mother who fell for the "open adoption" carrot that was dangled in front of her nose should have made everyone a little bit wary of the fact that, in most states, an "open" adoption can be slammed shut by the adopters and there is absolutely no recourse for the mother. It is also being noted that the patriarchal system is still trying to denigrate a woman who would dare to parent without a man at her side. The last I heard, it is OK to be in favor of the rights of women. It is a man that has suggested the re-opening of those horrific maternity prisons.

This nation, with all its Puritanical arrogance, perpetrated a crime against millions of young women during the era between the end of WWII and Roe v Wade. Unlike the stories about area 51, there has been a goodly amount of printed proof gathered to back this up and it WILL embarrass a lot of people. If you'd like to read some really good and valid information about the BSE, click * here and get your eyes opened, big time.

We Senior Mothers are getting on in years and, as we get older, we tend to say what is on our mind without worrying if it is tea-party-correct. I don't hate adopters. BUT I do hate the act of adopting and the entitled mindset that goes along with it. I also hate intolerance, genocide, child abuse and war.

I guess that makes me hateful. Whaddya think?

Whores, Sluts, Hussies and Light Skirts

Many of us, if not all, Senior natural Mothers have been called those names at one point or another. A lot of insecure adopters would "insinuate," to our children, that we had less than sterling morals and values when our children taken for adoption were conceived. In the BSE, psychologists, religious leaders and social workers had us labeled as psychologically unbalanced (see Rickie Solinger's "Wake Up Little Suzie" among other writings) and/or morally bankrupt.





Even today, so-called "experts" insist that teens get pregnant for the attention it brings them. Yeah, right. I can remember being so excited about the attention I was going to get when I discovered I was pregnant, that I considered suicide. Most of all, I remember the desperation, the isolation and the shame. I also remember the flood of love that went through me when I felt my babies move inside me. I remember having no one to whom I could turn for understanding and real support.





We were not seen as fit mother material due to our obvious moral and psychological deficiencies (as seen by the above-mentioned "experts") and we were branded and made the subject of malicious gossip for years. I remember my raised daughter, who was only eight at the time, overhearing some older women in the church talking about me and my "scandalous past." She cried that someone would talk about her mother like that.





Now, I see that there are some people, mostly MEN, that would like to see unmarried pregnancies treated the same way they were during the BSE. They want to see us punished, our babies taken from us and maternity homes reinstated. I wonder if they would be that quick to push such an agenda if men were the child-bearers. It all goes back to the imbalance in our patriarchal society and its Puritanical roots. Daughters of Eve are just not going to be cut a break by these arrogant Nimrods.





This is where Senior Moms need to be heard, loud and clear, that we refuse to let ANYONE label us with that scarlet letter, ever again and we won't allow you to do it to our daughters and granddaughters, either!





NOW HEAR THIS! I was never a whore, slut, hussy, light skirt, hooker, promiscuous or any of those other lascivious titles that the filthy-minded "good people" wanted to label me. Many of us were not...but what if we were? What frickin' business is it of yours? Males got a wink and a nudge for giving in to their hormones and we got branded. Fair? I think not.





You know, someone said that I was harming my message for being "too harsh." Honey, you don't know harsh until you have lived through what we have and then had your child taken from you because some blue-nosed SW managed to convince you that you were pond scum that would ruin your child's life. It's done more subtly, these days, but that is still how you manage to acquire those womb-fresh, healthy infants. "Harsh" is going into a downward emotional spiral on every birthday, Mother's Day and any other "family holiday." "Harsh" is looking into the face of every child you see on the street that is the same age as yours, wondering, hoping, being disappointed. "Harsh" is reuniting with a child that has been taught to judge you, despise you or diminish your importance in his or her life.





This didn't happen just to me. It happened to millions of women and it still happens. So excuse me if I sound "harsh" but that is what being a natural mother is....harsh, real and a struggle. I have a good life, now. I am happy, busy, loved and respected but the holes will always be in my heart.





That's just the way a mother is.

PS: And WHEN will you adopters accept the fact that, for the majority of us, there was no such thing as a "choice?" We were forced, coerced and shamed into surrender and, even if it is more subtly done, it still happens. Surrender is an act of desperation, waving the white flag. It is not a DAMN CHOICE!!!

Swattin' 'Skeeters

When I was a little girl, and that was a very, very long time ago, I had a favorite uncle...my Uncle Jack, who was a heavy smoker and would, sadly, die of his habit when I was 11. On one of my visits to South Carolina, I heard the porch swing creak and, every now and then, a loud slapping sound. I went out to see what those sounds were and there was Uncle Jack, sitting in the porch swing, flyswatter in hand, watching the fireflies and enjoying the cool breeze.

I asked him what he was doing and I'll never forget his reply. "Honey, I am enjoying the summer night and swattin' skeeters." I asked him why he didn't come in if the mosquitoes were bothering him and he said, "as long as I swat 'em, they don't bother me. The night sky and the 'lightnin' bugs are too pretty to miss just to avoid a few pesky skeeters." So I sat out on the porch with my Uncle Jack, looking at the stars, chasing fireflies and swattin' 'skeeters.

That's how I feel with this blog, sometimes. It is so nice to be out in the light, not hiding in some safe, anonymous, barfmuggle closet, relating what I have learned over a long lifetime of loss, reunion and education. It seems that there is so much to share and so many new things happening that I can put in these posts for others to read, learn if they will and ignore if they don't.

Lately, I have been hitting that "reject" icon a lot...my version of swattin' 'skeeters. They can buzz around with that high-pitched whine all they want, but none of the comments they post are going to change me, those that think like me, or the direction in which we are heading. It is not my responsibility to offer an open forum for debate on the issue. If that were so, the title of this blog would be "Motherhood Maybe Deleted?" I know how many hits I get per week. I don't think that it hurts anyone except the people who wish to discredit me that I don't carry on debates on my blog. Those comments are 'skeeters and I have my swatter close at hand.

If someone asks a civil question about my viewpoints, I'll answer. But I am not going to immerse myself in an ocean of sniping and spitting. I post my opinions, share what I have learned and, hopefully, help other mothers who have had to deal with this dehumanizing, tragic and grief-laden social experiment called adoption. I have received a lot of personal thank-you's from moms and adopted people, so I think I'll just keep on doing it my way.

Some of these protester/'skeeters seem to be doing all they can to justify their act of adoption. I have to wonder that, if they are so sure it is the right thing, then what do they care what I post and why do they have to defend themselves?

You might as well give up because nothing you can say or do is going to change me at this stage in my life. I've seen and experienced too much and seen too many other women like me go through the same thing to put it down to me "just having a bad experience." That one is unmitigated bullshit. If it is just "bad experiences," then there are millions of those that need addressing. My mother would be proud to know that I was labeled "sarcastic." She was the champion of that art.

So post what you will. Uncle Jack taught me, very well, how to swat 'skeeters. REJECT!!

( I have to add a Post Script that some of these argumentative comments constitute some of the highest praise I have ever received for my writing skills. heh heh)

More Scum Crawling Out of the Woodwork

Somebody is losing $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$!

Ah, things are not going well for PAPs who want the mother of their adoption-acquired bundle of joy completely out of the picture. More and more countries are getting tired of the self-entitled westerner invading their human garden and picking the young fruit, especially the ones who have parents that want them.

I've been accused of being narrow-minded because I sincerely believe these children should be raised within their own culture by natural family members. Well, darn these people for wanting to keep their children when there are superior, wealthier, Americans with the "right religion" and other things that want to take their children from them. What MUST they be thinking? Don't they know that the only valid parents are Caucasian, well-to-do, Christian with a house and a bank account? Oh, that's right...the "agency representative" assured you that the child was an orphan. Nooooo, they wouldn't lie, would they? Call me narrow-minded if you will, but I consider this practice to be the epitome of arrogance. Read on......

http://vietnamnews.vnagency.com.vn/showarticle.php?num=01CAS250708

Adoption gang members held
(25-07-2008)
NAM DINH — Nam Dinh Police have arrested two more suspects for their alleged involvement in an illegal adoption ring, according to Nguyen Ngoc Kha from the provincial Investigation Police Department.
Vu Dinh Khan, director of Truc Ninh District’s Social Protection Centre and head of Viet Hung Commune’s healthcare centre, and his son, Vu Van Kiem, an accountant at Khan’s social protection centre, are suspected of having forged State adoption documents.
The father and son allegedly picked up 242 children, mostly infants of unknown origin, from throughout the province and took them to Truc Ninh’s Social Protection Centre since its establishment in February 2005.
Khan allegedly co-operated with some directors of other communal healthcare centres in the district to forge documents identifying the children’s origins before putting 221 of them up for adoption abroad.
Nam Dinh Police arrested three other suspects in relation to the case last month, including Tran Trong Lam, a Nam Dinh City resident, Vu Dinh Loi from Yen Tien Commune’s healthcare centre in Y Yen District, and Truong Cong Lich from Yen Luong Commune’s healthcare centre in Y Yen District.
Kha said the case was under further investigation and more suspects could be arrested.
Some 100 children under 5 years old have allegedly been illegally put up for adoption abroad since 2006.

The northern province is situated about 90km south of Ha Noi. — VNS

As more and more young moms here in the US decide to keep their babies (OMIGOD!! Babies Raising Babies!!! Call out the morals police!), and have access to birth control and abortion, the baby-crazed now go far afield for their fantasy fulfillment. Gee, I wonder who adopted those 100 children?

What with a number of US-based agencies being investigated and many of them, as well as many government agencies, looking over their shoulders to see what the Senior Mothers from the BSE have in mind for them, I imagine that some of these folks are sweating bullets. Good!

We were kicked to the curb when we were the most vulnerable. Looks like it might be getting close to time to return the favor.

Baby Buyer, Beware

$$$$$$$$$$-the name of the game

Someone on another site was quick to refute my observations that the word is out on foreign adoptions, specifically, baby theft by profiteers pandering to the self-entitled (arrogant) Western PAP. Russia, Africa, Guatemala, Boznia-Herzigovia, Estonia and other countries, even Korea, Viet Nam and China, are starting to rein in their baby flesh trade "entrepreneurs" and it is about time. The fact is, it is the covetous greed and obsession of those wanting to adopt that has created this crime. Without a market, there can be no industry. Read on.


Stolen baby linked to Guatemala adoption system
(*link)
Story Highlights:
Dozens of mothers have reported stolen babies; at last two found in orphanages
DNA confirmation marks first time officials linked stolen baby to adoption system
Baby's mother said armed men locked her in closet in family's store, took baby
Tests identify baby in process of being adopted by U.S. couple

GUATEMALA CITY (AP) -- Adoption officials said DNA tests indicate a Guatemalan baby reported stolen from her mother was being adopted by a U.S. couple, the first strong sign that the Central American nation's troubled adoption system relied in part on abducted children.
Authorities have long believed that children were stolen or bought to supply Guatemala's US$100 million-a-year adoption industry before thousands of pending adoptions were frozen in May.

Previously, dozens of mothers reported stolen babies, and at least two were found in orphanages, although they had not yet been put up for adoption.

But adoption officials revealed to The Associated Press on Wednesday that DNA tests identified toddler Esther Zulamita, who was reported stolen on March 26, 2007. The girl was in the process of being adopted by an unidentified U.S. couple.

Jaime Tecu, director of a team of experts reviewing all pending Guatemalan adoptions, said the DNA test results represent the first time officials have directly linked a baby reported stolen by its mother to the fraud-plagued adoption system.

"This is the first time that we've been able to show, with irrefutable evidence, that a stolen child was put up for adoption," Tecu said. (wasn't the first, won't be the last..rw)
The baby's mother, Ana Escobar, said armed men locked her in a storage closet at the family's shoe store north of Guatemala City and took the 6-month-old.

"When I got out, my daughter was gone," she told the AP in an earlier interview about the case.
She spent months searching hospitals and orphanages, looking for the child.
In May, Escobar says she was sitting in the National Adoption Council's offices, hoping to get access to the babies whose adoption cases were being reviewed. She looked up and saw a toddler who looked like her baby. The image of the child being carried by an official haunted her, and she asked officials to see more photos. Soon she was sure the baby girl was hers.

All of the girl's papers were in order, including DNA tests showing that her birth mother was someone other than Escobar. But Escobar convinced officials to take new DNA tests.
"She was so sure that the child was hers that we agreed to search the house where the baby was kept," Tecu said.

The baby was placed with a caretaker while her adoption was pending, but Escobar convinced a Guatemalan judge in May to let her care for the child while the new DNA tests were performed.
"I can't explain how excited and happy I am," Escobar told the AP on Wednesday. "It's a miracle."

Tecu said officials will investigate the lawyers who handled the adoption (hope that includes the US attorneys, as well and the adopters..rw), the doctor who signed the falsified DNA tests, and anyone else associated with the process."This was run by a mafia, and we're going after them," he said.

Guatemala froze all 2,286 pending adoptions in May, and officials are reviewing each case to confirm there is no fraud. At the same time, Guatemala is just starting to adopt babies under a new, more stringent system run by an independent adoption commission.
Before the reform, foreign couples, mostly from the U.S., paid up to US$30,000 to adopt children. The previous system was so quick and hassle-free it became the second-largest source of foreign babies to U.S. couples after China.

Copyright 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Links referenced within this article Guatemalahttp://topics.edition.cnn.com/topics/GuatemalaAssociated Presshttp://edition.cnn.com/interactive_legal.html#APGuatemalahttp://topics.edition.cnn.com/topics/Guatemala


Investigations, by local government officials, into something so lucrative have suffered up until this break-through. It looks like a little bit of national pride on the part of the Guatemalans was a very good thing. The baby trade, just like the opium trade in Iraq and Afghanistan, is singing a siren call to the poor in the third world. If you can make money, do it and hang the consequences. It is the same mind-set that contributes to the slash and burn tactics in the rain forests.

I have to wonder about the protestations of the adopters of Chinese girls. I notice that the first child born after the disastrous natural calamity in China was a girl and she was welcomed and celebrated. Things have been changing for over a decade in China, but adopters will still cling to the idea of the "one child policy and only boys are welcome" policy, that has been changing for a while, now, the same way many domestic adopters assert that "their barf muggle" was a crack whore who insisted they take her baby.

My main concern, as a mother, is these children, how they will perceive their adoptions and how it will make them feel to know that they were a band-aid to slap over the wound of infertility, a second choice or a measure taken to save a marriage (which usually ends, anyway) and, were probably stolen from their real families. The Ugly American is so sure that our culture, our way of life, our religions, etc., is sooooo superior to anyone else's that the UA Adopter expects gratitude and loyalty and most of them are out being fitted for their halos. Our national arrogance makes us very unattractive, indeed.

If I could speak to all of these baby-covetors, I would ask that they leave these children alone and in their own culture with people who look and act like them. Don't traumatize them any more than they have already been. Mentor a young person, spoil your nieces and nephews, work in a nursery and/or a boy's and girl's club, but leave these babies alone. Help their mothers find them. Speak out against the theft of a child for profit. Don't aid and abet this crime.

You might not get a baby out of the deal, but you might sleep better at night. And, for Heaven's sake, if you are obsessed with the idea of a baby for yourself, get help!

"Give Me A Child, Lest I Die"

SOLOMON'S DECISION

The stories are from all over our country, about women who covet a child, so badly, they will murder for one. This woman has even tried it more than once. Here's a rundown of more of these "cutters" who will invade the womb of a woman to obtain the fetus and claim it as their own. I don't have enough space on this blog to list them all, but you read your news, and you know how prevalent this atrocity is becoming. It is taking the old Biblical lament for a child and altering it to say, "give me a child, lest YOU die."

Many a potential adopter will shake their heads and "tsk-tsk" at the lengths to which these desperate women will go to get a child, yet don't equate that extreme with the baby-raiding they do on a daily basis. I have seen cases where a young, pregnant, some even MARRIED women were followed around in Wal-Mart, at the mall and other places, by women who finally approached her with a card giving all the reasons why she and her husband would make better parents for her child than she would or to just outright ask her for her baby. Rude doesn't even begin to cover it, but is it any worse than those saccharine "Dear Barfmuggle" letters and ads?

No, not really, as I answer my own, rhetorical question. This kind of desperation for a baby is pathological, psychotic and very, very dangerous. I see this frenzy in women becoming so prevalent that it is frightening. These wannabe's will travel to other countries to adopt a baby or toddler in order to avoid ever having to deal with the fact that there is a natural mother. They jump into open adoption agreements and then slam them shut in the mother's face the minute their fantasy of "as if born to" becomes threatened or if the child prefers and delights in the natural mother's visits. Then they whine about the mother not wanting contact. They don't stop to think that, for many of these mothers, contact is just too damn painful. I can't imagine knowing my child and having no say in the decisions made for that child's welfare, to hear my child call another woman "Mommy" and to be treated like a distant relative or worse. No, open adoption is torture for the mother.

I am wondering what would happen if, instead of billions of dollars being spent trying to "fix" infertility and promote adoption, there were more efforts made towards practical counseling to help people deal with and accept their condition the way other disabilities are treated. This is the only human condition where human infants are used as two aspirin and a band-aid. In the end, adoption "fixes" nothing, confuses a child and, secretly, disappoints a lot of adopters.

There was a time in our recent history when, if a married couple did not produce children, that was just the way things were, and they went on to live full and productive lives. The drive to produce offspring is a genetic urge to reproduce ones genetic heritage. Adoption just doesn't do that. And giving birth does not make a woman "complete." If she is not already complete within herself, then she has a problem that a plethora of womb-fresh adoptees will not solve.

There are those who say that adoption will always be with us. I pray that is not so, but if it is, then there needs to be more done towards counseling prospective adopters, helping them deal with the fact that adopting is not going to fix infertility, save a marriage or complete a persona. Seeing children as something to covet has created "Womb-raiders" of all kinds, from the celebrity baby-buyer to the womb-cutter.

What's wrong with this picture?

God's Will?

This article, from the NSW Origins site, is one of the very best I have read, to date, that totally and scripturally debunks this asinine assumption that adoption is "God's Will" and, somehow, meant to be. The title is "God's Will or God's Swill?" and is written by a natural father. I advise everyone to click on the link and read this. It is now one of my favorite pieces for the following reasons.

The will of the Almighty is just one of the many arguments pro-adoptionists, church-affiliated agencies and pious PAP's use to justify the disruption of the sacred, mother-child bond. Having been raised in the Bible Belt, in church every Sunday whether I liked it or not, and being well-versed in scripture, it has amazed me how the Christian adoption contingent has twisted and turned the words to benefit their aims. Remember, it says, in the Bible, that, "even Satan can quote scripture" to his own benefit. Take anything out of context and you can make it mean whatever you want it to mean.

This isn't an new thing, here. In the middle ages, clergy used the myth of Eve to challenge the existence of souls in women. Paul, obviously misogynistic, was a part of a paternalistic era that, obviously, saw women as more "originally sinful" than man and responsible for men's lust. When the Puritans began their colony in North America, that idea and misrepresentation of scripture, disdain for human sexuality and the rights of the patriarchs came with them. It taints our culture to this day. The Catholic priesthood still will not allow women into their ranks.

The Baby Scoop Era is a perfect example of that attitude of the "sins of the mothers" being chastised while the sins of the daddies were ignored. Because we are the ones who gestate and give birth, we were the ones who got the stinky end of the stick. We were the ones who were supposed to control the hormone-driven ardor of these young bucks and we were held solely responsible for the results if we failed to do so.

Among those who wanted to give us the hardest possible time when we had the audacity to love, not wisely, but too well, were the established churches. My judges were Protestant, but the horror stories I have heard about the Catholic Charities "homes" and processes are chillingly similar. We were wayward women, sluts, fallen angels, used goods and needed to be punished. There are still quite a few hateful people in this society that feel that way. Maybe we have evolved, in science and technology, towards species adulthood, but socially and spiritually, we are still in junior high school!

My mother, a product of the Bible Belt South, told me, when I became engaged, that, due to my lack of a hymen, I could not wear white or have a church wedding. It is a sad commentary on the nature of religion and society that a minute membrane would rob a young woman of the right to experience what all girls, back then, dreamed of. When I married, the second time, at age 43, I wore white, carried flowers and was married by an ordained minister. So frickin' THERE!

I no longer attend church or call myself a "Christian." I have been too battered by that bunch as have many of my sisters. I am not a non-believer. I do know that there is a power greater than us and I pray and I practice spiritual values. But, until we get past the patriarchal, oppressive and intolerant structures of organized religion, we are doomed to being controlled and coerced and goaded by fear into judging and despising and living with hypocrisy. The God/dess in whom I believe is not so small, narrow, spiteful and hateful. That arrogance is the territory of Man.

AND, the God/dess in whom I believe didn't create adoption.

Another One Bites The Dust

Ah, there has been another blow to the baby-trade, right here in my home state of Florida, one of the most adoption-friendly states in the union and its' neighbor, Georgia. We celebrate this action as being one step closer to a safer environment for mothers and their infants. Of course, the complaint was not based on the coercion of mothers, but on the bilking of potential adopters. Anyone who doubts that the adoption industry is all about the $$$$ is working blind. Here's the story. It comes from First Coast News.

Embattled Adoption Agency Gives Up Its License
Posted By: Jackelyn Barnard 10 hrs ago
JACKSONVILLE, FL -- The baby room is ready for the little boy and girl the Ernfridssons were hoping to adopt with the help of Adoption Blessings Worldwide. But $40,000 (So that's the going price for a pair of babies..rw) later, that room sits empty and their dreams are on hold. (I feel for them but I can't quite reach them. rw)
"We don't want anymore families to go through what we went through. We lost our entire life savings. We were promised children and that didn't happen," says Lori Ernfridsson. (Gee, maybe their mothers decided to keep them...what a concept! rw)

They are just one of the families who stepped forward to make complaints about the agency to state authorities. (Had those complaints been made by mothers or adopted people, no one would have listened. rw) The complaints were made weeks ago, but First Coast News learned that on Thursday, Georgia officials received notification that ABW was relinquishing its license.
The agency was once licensed in Florida and based on the First Coast under a different name, Tedi Bear Adoptions, years ago. After numerous problems and state investigations, the agency surrendered its license to Florida authorities in 2003.

The agency was already licensed in Georgia, and changed its name from Tedi Bear to Adoption Blessings Worldwide, but its executive director, Tedi Hedstrom, still had a home in Ponte Vedra.

Complaints against ABW started rolling in to Georgia and Florida authorities months ago.
"That's why they're shutting down. There's been too many problems to continue doing business for them," Andreas Ernfridsson told First Coast News. Hedstrom did not return phone calls to her home and cell phone.

In a statement released by her attorney, Rick Rumrell, Hedstrom says she's been "....praying that God give her direction in regards to the future...with Adoption Blessings Worldwide.... It is with great regret that Adoption Blessings Worldwide and Tedi Hedstrom will be formally closing its doors to adoption services."

"We were absolutely thrilled to hear that," says Lori Ernfridsson. The couple is taking legal action to get their money back. "They need to pay the money back to these couples that have been hurt and suffered, and they need to never practice again," says Andreas Ernfridsson.
First Coast News has learned that a number of former ABW clients will soon be filing a lawsuit against the agency. (what about a lawsuit for the mothers bilked out of their newborns?rw)

The agency told Georgia authorities it will relinquish its license by July 31, 2008.
Hedstrom's attorney says pending adoptions will go forward with another licensed agency. (Jeez, they're thicker that ticks on a coon hound.) Hedstrom does not want to reveal what agency that will be until all clients are notified.

How convenient for the unethical purveyors of the baby flesh trade to invoke the Almighty. Just as the potential adopters buy into the idea that God intends for them to "save" a baby by adopting, these agency mavens used references to "blessings" and "prayer" to get them business and now, they hope, out of a world of trouble. I doubt they will enjoy the fruits of their labors because the baby-buyers are not going to lie down and kiss their dollars for diaper wearers goodbye.

Hasta La Vista, Adoption Blessings Worldwide/Teddy Bear whatever. May you be followed by many more. Now, if we can just get rid of the industry lobby in Tallahassee and Washington.....

Some Answers For a Good Question

Someone recently raised the question of what happens to the mother who truly does not wish to raise a child. Should she be required to keep the baby in order to prevent adoptee issues from harming the child? I have to recognize the fact that there are those women who have no maternal feelings and who do not wish to raise children. I do not judge them. I respect those who are honest about it and I understand that it's still a world of individuals..different strokes for different folks is a truism.

My question, in return, would be, what would such a woman be doing risking pregnancy, then? In most places, unmarried women from the teen years on up, have access to something we didn't have in my era...safe, effective birth control. My niece (unmarried) recently had that new IUD inserted and is very happy with it. She is a single mom, raising two daughters and doesn't want any more. There is also the option of sterilization which can be done on an outpatient basis. I had my tubal ligation after the birth of my fourth child and it worked like a charm. Even at that time, they would not do the same thing for an unmarried woman in my state. Now, my husband's cousin, age 30 and with no children, who is immersed in her burgeoning career, has opted for a childless life and has had a tubal ligation. More power to her.

If, perish the thought, the birth control method failed, then there is the option, again, of a safe, medical, legal termination of the pregnancy. It is still the law of the land that a woman has this choice. My personal feeling is that I would rather see an embryo aborted than to see a child surrendered and told that his/her mother didn't want the responsibility of a child.

OK, so then we have the women who are, for religious or other reasons, opposed to abortion. Well, then I think someone had better either check with Daddy-kins or their own family members about raising this child in their families of origin or, bite the bullet and give the kid a chance to grow on you. You'd be surprised how those little critters can bore into your heart and lift your spirits.

I'm sorry, but I don't find the lack of maternal instinct a valid reason for surrender of a child for adoption. Women have more autonomy and more information than we BSE moms had. Many of us were not even knowledgeable about things such as birth control or the mechanics of pregnancy and childbirth. And we all know that condoms can fail, even for the young men who were thoughtful enough to use protection.

I know too damn many of these horny Lotharios who really didn't give a rat's ass because they knew that the onus would fall on the girl and all they would get would be a wink and a nudge and a good reason to avoid said girl's male relatives. In my day, as was pointed out by a friend on a support list, men grew up with the Playboy Philosophy and women were airbrushed sex objects, period. They weren't all like that, but I went through enough wrestling matches with dates to know this specious mindset was prevalent.

So, to the women who do not want the responsibility of raising a child...you have your options and you can even have your relationships because you have access to what we didn't. If you know that is how you feel, then be proactive and do something before you enjoy your new boyfriend's favors. So many people decry using abortion as birth control...well, I find it to be damaging to a child and a mother to use adoption for the same reason. This, for the Senior Mother, was society's and our parent's form of birth control and all it has done is create broken hearts and confused adoptees.

If money is a problem, get thee hence to the nearest county Health Department. They will be thrilled to fix you up with whatever you need to stay in a non-fecund state.

Either that, or get thee to a nunnery. Abstinence works, but it sure isn't any fun, especially if you are over 21 and paying your own way. We have seen how well the "Abstinence-only" programs are doing. Human nature just seems to overrule that particular idea.

Misunderstandings Abound

It seems that you have to outright name names in order to keep people from misinterpreting what you write, these days. Much disturbance in the force, there is, Obi-Wan. Little patience I am having, Darth Anonymous. Yoda, I am not, everyone.





I introduced SMAAC with a post that called for inclusiveness and non-cliquish elitism. It seems some anonymous person thinks that I meant to point out certain people that were involved with BSERI. Actually, this commenter, who would not give her name, needs to make a 180-degree turn to spot the folks about whom I was speaking. I think they are still spitting out our dust.





For the record, I greatly admire Ann Fessler and have her book, but have a few issues with the writings of Nancy Verrier. While she brought the truth about the trauma of separation to light, she still writes from the vantage point of a self-entitled adopter. I consider Rickie Solinger a pioneer in this area of research and her books have a proud place in my home. I also think that the writings of Joe Soll and Karen W. Buterbaugh are very helpful, especially for those who are struggling. There are scores of others, published and non-published, that have my respect and admiration, the courageous Jess DeBalzo among them.





No, anonymous....you are obviously sensitive to the point of paranoia because I have already made myself clear on these issues. Look over your shoulder at where you have been and you will see the people I describe.





I would also think that abolishing adoption would be a natural follow-up to the seeking of justice for the Senior Mother of adoption loss. One step at a time is all we can take.





I do NOT apologize for challenging the idea that the only people worthy of seeking this justice have to be those with "credentials." SMAAC has been formed as a grass-roots movement to compliment the work of those who bring more education, etc., to the fray. All I was trying to point out is that we refuse to be left out of the process, entirely, and decry the idea of being shut out of the "inner circle" and that our passions are our credentials. But, we can live without any of that and still try to do what we set out to do. We have our own "inner circle" but it is a lot more inclusive. Whether you realize it or not, your enemies and ours are the same.





Our focus is solely on the Senior Mothers and their experience of coercion, isolation, shaming, blaming and ultimate loss...acts against us carried out overtly and with impunity. The rest, such as the abolishment of adoption, will follow. I think, since we have the same objectives, that we could manage to "play well with others." Ya think?





Another person had some unkind things to say about the post eulogizing Dian Wellfare. According to this commenter, Di did NOT believe in an official apology as being part of the package and that she was aggrandized at the cost of many other brave, Australian mothers..that is the anonymous commenter's opinion...not mine. That may have an element of truth, but I don't really know. I posted the information I had. You, commenter, are free to form your own blog and contradict that post. You can even use your real name, like I do. I continue to honor Di as a fighter and a pioneer. That was never meant to diminish the efforts of others in Australia. For Pete's sake. She had just passed away!





Now, if that has answered the nay-sayers, us Big, Bad, Old Breeder-Bitches have work to do. Oh, and to one other commenter...I disagree with your idea of what it means to be called a Bitch. Usually, one is called names when they hit too close to home with what they have to say. This is war and war isn't "nicey-nice."





That symbol is our flag and we are forming ranks. Alliances are welcome, but we will proceed with or without anyone else's approval.

I'm A Dinosaur Bitch!!!

And darn proud of it. Of course, I can tell you where I got it. My paternal grandmother, a tiny wasp of a woman, was a Bitch on Wheels and a very, very good person. She just refused to take any crap from anyone and, when it waddled, quacked, swam and looked like a duck, she called it a duck. I don't look like her, but I inherited her Chutzpah. Actually, I look like my grampa. See, having been raised in my natural family, I know these things.

I find it interesting that people will twist and tangle all the things they know about a person if the person has the temerity to be either an adoptee (disloyal and ungrateful) or a natural mother (bitter and angry). Let us speak up against adoption, and for the rights of either the mothers or the adoptees or both, and we are blazing bitches from Hell. Some of us natural moms had thought about getting some tee shirts that read "I'm a Slut," a'la Bastard Nation with their wonderful sense of humor. But I think, for us older moms from the BSE, that "Bitch" is more appropriate.

We are dinosaurs..."Girls Who Went Away"....basically decent but reviled women from a time that the industry now wants to keep in the category of a minor, historical footnote. They sure don't want it brought out into the light of public scrutiny. I work out at the YMCA with women who adopted from that era and are now in their later 70's and early 80's and they swear that they "didn't know" we were being abused and coerced out of our children. They call our babies "gifts" and pretend that the mothers of THEIR adoptees were just unable to care for the child so they were presented with a little bundle to own "as if born to." Yeah, right.

Every adopter I know thinks that their case is different. One thought that, if she had not adopted a certain child, that child would have just wasted away in foster care or a hospital or institution. Nah...wouldn't have happened. There are too many wannabe AP's out there for that to happen. And to believe everything a social agency says is to be more gullible than anything. Most SW's do NOT search the family of origin for someone to take in a child that cannot stay with his or her mother. Get real! My daughter says that if it had not been her adopters that took her, it would have been someone else. This "meant to be" crap is mental and emotional masturbation.

The thing about being a Bitch is that it is what it takes, most of the time, to be heard and to be acknowledged. "Playing nice" with adopters and agencies and adoption institutions doesn't work. We get so tired of these people speaking for us that we are having to speak over them. Of course, most people, especially men, think that an assertive, confident woman is a Bitch because she doesn't defer to the "elite," again, especially men. I am lucky to be married to a man who respects strength in a woman and can more than hold his own with me. I told him I had been called a Bitch and he smiled and said, "You betcha, Baby..and damn good at it, too!"

What matters to me is being called, "Mom," which ALL my children do, or "Nanny" or "Big Mama" as my grands and great-grands do, or "girlfriend," as my wonderful friends do. I am wealthy beyond measure in those categories.

So, I think we have it straight, now...an adopter is an adopter and a Bitch is a Bitch (the person who called me that said it like it was a bad thing??). Lesson over.

What is NBC THINKING????

Or they are not thinking, at all? This has been done before and the results are not definitive. However, as Senior Mothers of adoption loss, many of us have seen the disturbing results of the pre-verbal trauma to an infant or toddler, placed with strangers and with the vital connection to their mother broken. Why don't they just give these kids some birth control and accept that, no matter how good the teen, sex happens. It's built into us in our hormones and need to replicate our genetic heritage. This is PAST ridiculous. Teach them how to be good parents if they find themselves expecting. Quit trying to hold back Nature with psychological theories.

THE FOLLOWING EDITORIAL NOTE APPEARED IN NEW JERSEY'S BERGEN RECORD

Donson, Costa: How low will reality TV go?

Friday, June 27, 2008

NBC calls this new program a 'social experiment.' It is certainly an experiment, but in the worst sense of the word. WE ARE CONCERNED and outraged at the launching of "Baby Borrowers," the latest in NBC's "reality series" programming. In this macabre new form of media "entertainment," a number of infants and toddlers are being subjected to a three-day separation from their parents and placed instead in the hands of total strangers. Teenage strangers. NBC calls this a "social experiment."

It is certainly an "experiment," but in the worst sense of the word. More than 80 years of child-development research convinces us that such obvious neglect of a young child's need for continuity in his family life will result in severe emotional and developmental harm for these very vulnerable young children. Everyone working in the field of infant mental health is familiar with the series of films created by James and Joyce Robertson, working with John Bowlby, made in the Sixties, graphically demonstrating the confusion, protest, sadness, despair and eventually profound and prolonged depression resulting when young toddlers were separated from their parents (even through parental hospitalization) for "only" a few days.

As the bonds of attachment with parents are disrupted, so, too, will the infant or toddler become severely disrupted in her sense of security, sense of self and confident expectation that she will be cared for and relieved of distress. Stability and reliability in addition, the child's confidence to explore the world with feelings of safety, as well as her future ability to form secure and healthy relationships, is dependent on the stability and reliability of trusted parental caregivers.

The failure of society to understand that infants and young children require consistency, predictability, reliability, respect, developmentally appropriate expectations and loving care is evident in all too many ways. This program perpetuates the notion that babies can be moved, like property, to any home, any person, at any time. Even when infants, toddlers and children who have been maltreated are removed from their caregivers for their protection, they suffer separation and need healthy ways to remain connected to their families. Babies and toddlers are invariably distressed when separated from their parents. They cry and become angry. They can become depressed and unable to sleep or eat. The longer the separation, the more prolonged are these reactions.

A three-day separation in the hands of strangers is clearly far too long. NBC sets a dangerous precedent in our media-dazzled society, which has apparently become more and more indifferent to the care necessary to the healthy development and emotional lives of our young children.

We must request that NBC take immediate steps to withdraw this series.Nathaniel Donson of Teaneck is a child psychiatrist and psychoanalyst and is a faculty member of the Columbia Psychoanalytic Center for Training and Research. Gerard Costa, also of Teaneck, is a developmental psychologist and a professor at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey. ("To which I added a response to a reader's comment: " *comment of original poster)

1. Nathaniel Donson, MD says: Unfortunately, Midge misses the point of our protest, as does NBC, as she overlooks the experience of these infants, emphasizing instead only that of the teenagers. In day care, infants and toddlers are not only given time to become familiar with their caregivers, they become familiar with them from day to day, and are picked up by parents at the end of each day. Even so, for parents, as well as for their infants and toddlers, even the best daycare care is often a difficult stress - which, understandably, most daycare parents would rather avoid thinking about. In fact whenever I've asked mothers about missing their daycare cared for children, tears come to their eyes. And every professional who works in the field of Infant Mental Health knows that there is a parallel emotional experience going on in the baby. Unfortunately, Midge apparently knows nothing about the traumatic effects of even brief abandonments of very young children - which we see over and over again in our Infant Mental Health treatment centers, and which are so very difficult to reverse in subsequent therapeutic work. And why in the world would parents agree to loan their very young children for such a "social experiment?" Are they being paid? Nathaniel Donson, MD (good question, Doc. rw)

""Call NBC at 212- 664- 4444 and ask for the comment line. It is checked every 30 minutes. Share your concern!! ""

I've called and I hope their ears are still ringing.

Surrender=Defeat

Many people see this blog as an "adoption issues" blog. For those of us from the BSE, Senior Mothers, the issue is a bit more complex. True, it is the demand for infants for the infertile that was a motivating force in what happened to us and our children. But, when we talk about investigation, redress, apologies, and attention to what happened to us, we are talking more about the events and actions that led to the act of the surrender of our children.

Surrender is an act of defeat..more caving in than giving up. It comes after a war has been waged. It happens when there is no other option available for survival. It happens when someone has been beaten down to the lowest point they can go. It is the waving of the white flag of losing and sorrow and pain. It is the Hiroshima of the Senior Mother of adoption loss. It is the withdrawal from the fray and the tears of the disarmed, out of ammunition soldier who knows she can fight no longer.

Most of us were forced by the social climate, shamed and angry parents, coercive social workers, cruel nurses and doctors, judgmental clergy...all or some of these....into a corner where we were seen as and, often felt, "unfit" by virtue of our unmarried status, and/or our youth and lack of financial independence.

Very few of us were given a choice in the matter. I was told I would not be bringing a bastard back to my home by my father. My mother was frantically trying to "re-virginize" me and save my "future." I was bombarded by the social workers with all the reasons why I should surrender and all my reasons for keeping either of my children, including the son conceived by violence, were beaten down with reasons of my basic lack of "fitness." The "horrid consequences" of keeping my babies, in terms of what would happen to them and to me, read like a tragic novel.

This was a different time..a time when women, especially YOUNG women had little to no autonomy. This was the time when conceiving outside the bonds of marriage meant expulsion from school, eviction from apartments, being fired from your job and being seen as both morally and psychologically deficient for the girls. The guys got a wink and a nudge and went on with their lives. We were caught in the riptide of a horrible social injustice and pulled under by the millions. Don't take my word for it...go to the SMAAC or the BSERI homepages. Read Ann Fessler's "The Girls Who Went Away" and Ricki Solinger's "Wake Up Little Susie."

Most of us are grandmothers...those of us who were not stricken by secondary infertility caused by our trauma. Many of us are in reunion and have seen the sad, angry results of that "ideal solution" of the BSE...the one that would address two "problems," the 'unwed mother' and the infertile, married couple. Wow! Wasn't that a smart idea? NOT! Now, our instinctive wisdom in wanting to keep and raise our babies is being proven to be valid and as nature intended.

Surrender was all we had left. PTSD, holes in our hearts, bad lifestyle choices, yearly pain on birthdays and secrets and lies were our lot in life as a result. I became an over-protective mother to my raised children, eating disordered and a silent partner in a bad, first marriage. Some of us told our spouses, if we married, some of us kept the secret and then had to come out of the closet, years later, when those children, whom we were told would never think of us, came searching.

For many of us, reunion threw us into a paroxysm of grief and the re-living of that time in our lives when we were isolated, coerced, blamed, shamed and deserted by our friends, families and, too often, the fathers of our babies. I had to take time off work in order to live through the onslaught of emotions, both positive and negative, when my daughter found me after a long search. That same year, we found my son and it was as if I had been gut-punched to see the damaged individual he has become. Reunion did not and does not "fix" the pain of the Senior Mother, nor does it make up for the injustice that led to surrender. To say that is was "just the way things were back then" is the same as saying that slavery was "just the way it was" in the day when kidnapped African men and women were treated like animals.

The crimes against the mother of the BSE are legion. We were the objects of scorn, rejection, judgment, and every kind of injustice that could be heaped on our very young shoulders. Just as Bastard Nation keeps its priority one of open records, we Senior Mothers have our priority..the seeking of justice for those of us who suffered under a very harsh social system and lost our children to the system and then, to closed, secret adoption just because they could do that to us, openly and without fear of interference from anyone. They are not so overt, these days, but they are trying to pull this Puritanical mess of a society back in that direction. We have to keep our eyes on the one goal that needs our attention which is addressing what happened THEN. That could, very likely, keep it from being repeated in today's world.

Not no, but HELL no to that giant step BACKWARDS! Not if we can help it and we think we can...in fact, we are at the point of KNOWING we can.

Move aside, NCFA and the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute. We Senior Mothers are more than capable of speaking for ourselves. (And we are still a wee mite pissed about it when you try to speak for us.)

"Independence" Day

Ah, yes. Today is the fourth of July, three cheers for the red, white and blue and all that. I am convinced, though, that America has long ceased to be the home of the "free." The picture taken, above, is an army propaganda piece that shows my grandson, KC, being "counseled" for combat stress "control." Yeah, right. Bring him and his comrades home from this farce of a war and that should help that PTSD a lot!

It looks to me like our soldiers in the middle east are getting the same kind of "quality" counseling that we (mothers of adoption loss) got. We were told to, "go on with our lives," that we would "forget" and that having more children would "cure" our grief. Mothers of today are told the same thing, only in the honeyed words of pro-adoption counselors provided by the agencies that marketed our newborns and social wreckers that play God with our family connections. Any trauma can cause PTSD and there are so many mothers who are still, decades after the fact of surrender, struggling with this condition.

The freedom to have a family is fast becoming a privilege granted only to the "more deserving" and the government that WE have elected is doing all this in OUR name. Like this misbegotten attempt to control an industry through combat, there is that factor that wants to emulate Adolph Hitler and create an "ideal society" through eugenics.

In the era of the Senior Mothers, like me, it was overt, punitive, fueled by shaming and the puritanical, sexist mores of an unjust, patriarchal society. Then, when women became able to make more of their own choices, it became Madison Avenue-slick, covert and the artful work of spin doctors changing the language. But, under all that facetious, saccharine advertising, there lurks the same message..."Thou art unworthy."

All of this crap will continue until we, as a nation, take back our government from the lobbyists and power-brokers. What we think is a "choice" is nothing more than a carefully orchestrated charade and so many of us buy into that bad deal. I see a nation of sheep with shepherds that love fresh mutton.

I know, we complain but what do we do about it? Hey, I'd love to run for president. You want to write me in? I'd investigate the BSE and demand the return of many children to their families of origins. I'd open records for both adopted people AND mothers and I would bring our military home from that bleak, desolate pit of horror over there. I would make some REAL changes in our economy and educational system.

Yep, if I were qualified, I would run. But the truth is that, if I tried, I would still be picking myself up out of the mud when the "super delegates" and the supreme courts got through making our choices for us.

There are those who say that America just isn't what it used to be and they are so right. But, more than that, America just never quite got to be what it was meant to be and that is the real tragedy. Today, I grill out, watch fireworks, fly the flag and dream of a nation that has fallen short of its promise but still has what it takes to make it.....

.......if people will just stop, listen and learn. God/dess, HELP America.

Oh, Give Me A Break

The Adoption Industry

As our children struggle to open up their adoption records, the Industry, even mindful of their market, keeps letting its influence be known and inserting its slimy tentacles into every action in an attempt to keep the wheels of the flesh trade turning. What started out as a fair, open-records bill in Michigan, has been altered, as reported by my friend, Marley on The Daily Bastardette. They are still wanting to treat our adult children as eternal infants who have to answer to the agencies, state (aka 'Human Services') and adopters. The Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute, famous for speaking out of both sides of the institutional mouth, has been doing a bit of mixing things up through their "representative," and others are adding riders and conditions, for the sake of "barmuggle privacy (read protecting adopters from the truth)."

I am, first and foremost, a senior mother activist concerned with the injustices of that era and the taking of our children for adoption, and I am not involved in the fight for open records for adoptees, but the resistance and feeble rationales they are giving these American ADULTS just chaps my hide. I may not be involved, but I support their efforts. They are, as we senior mothers are, single-minded in their goal. I have learned a lot from watching them and I am sick at heart to see them treated the same way we have been treated.

When we made our sorrow and suffering known in regards to our adoption loss and closed, secret adoptions, the industry, trying to look all compassionate towards us slut-mommies, threw us a bone...so-called "open" adoption. That little item is causing a whole new set of problems and, in most states, is totally unenforceable.

Their spin-doctors have changed the language, calling a pregnant woman a "birth(gag)mother" before she is even in her final trimester, talking about "placing" and "making an adoption plan" and other noxious terms such as "forever families," the most obnoxious misnomer to come down the pike in a long time. We have a real battle ahead of us since the legislature is rotten with adopters and attorneys who specialized in adoption. Add the industry lobbies to the mix and you get a picture of us being Col. Travis, Davy Crockett and Jim Bowie and them being General Santa Ana's army. Remember the Alamo!

The ACLU won't touch us with a ten-foot tort so we, mothers and children, are in the fray, armed with our pitchforks and squirrel guns, coming from the enemy from two sides. Being a South Carolinian, I have to remind myself of the guerrilla tactics of Francis Marion, the "Swamp Fox," and realize that we can make inroads if we keep our eyes on the prize.

Have at them, Bastard Nation, and keep reporting their manipulations and deals and steals. And don't believe, for a moment, that a few cowering, brainwashed mothers represent the majority of us. We WANT our children to have their heritage. After all, it is the real deal.

Anyone for Calimari? Hey, the squid is a relative.