Monday, July 06, 2009

Who's "Anonymity" is Protected?

As those of us who want our information are finding, not everyone was in the dark about who was who in adoption land. The whole argument about protecting the privacy of the natural mother flies out the window when you view actual adoption decrees and documents available to those who adopt.
One mother/adopted person from our era, who lives in MO, saw several adoption documents and, on ALL of them, the natural mother's name was right there, as clear as day. That means that the people who adopted KNOW the mother's name and could give it to their adoptees. This further proves that the parties protected by the closed, secret adoption process were the adopters, NOT the mothers. Tales are now coming out from several sources which back this up...that the mother's full name was available to most adopters.
One document pertaining to adoption from that era talks about being able to "guarantee that the (adopters) will be free of interference from the natural mother." The specter of the mother showing up, pining for her child, has long been the worst nightmare of the adopter. The fact that they fear this and that the adoption facilitators knew they needed some kind of safe-guard against that eventuality proves, to me, that they knew the emotional impact on the mother would be intense.
One mother is extremely angry about the fact that her son's adopters knew who she was. They could have saved her son a lot of trouble. Despite the fact that they told him they would help if he wanted to search, and despite the fact that they knew her name, they never volunteered the information to her son. It is also infuriating to think that we spent decades in the dark about the welfare of our children when the ones who had our children had open access to our identities.
So all this crap about "protecting the (natural) mother's privacy" is pure manure. The fact that many (No, I can't say ALL) of these people had our names means that fairness should ensure that we have equal access to their identities AND to the amended and original birth certificates of our children. We have been saying, for years, that none of us were ever promised life-long anonymity from our offspring. That has been nothing but smoke, mirrors and the adoption industry covering their pink asses.
The more we find out, the more there is for those in the industry and those who benefited from our loss to worry about. It's about time that the myth of the protection of the (natural)mother's privacy was laid to rest. I, for one, am tired of taking the heat from adoptees who believe that garbage and the ones who spread it around. It was the ADOPTERS who wanted and got the protection...period!
Let's try a little bit of truth in the mix.


Being Me said...

"The specter of the mother showing up, pining for her child, has long been the worst nightmare of the adopter. "

And a very reasonable fear too. Making sure we knew we had no right to the information was another way of telling us we weren't worthy of knowing our own children. That information could have been very disruptive to adoptive families.

birthmothertalks said...


Sandy Young said...

Truth? In the adoption mix? Surely you jest!!! Truth is too innovative to even consider when it comes to adoption....and besides, if they start telling the TRUTH, there won't BE any more adoption!!! It is ALL predicated on lies and deception.

Silly you, Robin!! Truth!!??? Hahahaha!!!

Good work, My Sister.

maybe said...

This may also explain why a lot of adoptive parents destroy the paper work....don't want to make it easy for junior to find his mother's name on the documents.

I would love to see this discussed everytime the "b mommy" privacy BS is brought up.

Chris said...

ROBIN!!! You have been missed on your own blog! I am happy to see your newest entries.

I have read more recently where some adoptees are saying..that their amother always said..when the adopted person was ready to search the amother would help in the search. How's that..if amom didn't have any info on the natural mother in a closed adoption? And yes, does make one wonder how many old adoptors destroyed paperwork, so that 'junior' wouldn't have a clue.
My own lost child would garner her non-id info when she was 21 yrs old. When we first met showed me her 'file'. And Lo & maiden name (last name)was all over it..only my first name was blanked out..And O! my address where I was living at the time, was on that non-id as well. So makes one wonder was this same info given to her adoptors, way back when?

Glad you're back...I missed you!!