Tuesday, September 07, 2010

Why Adopters? It's Logical

Why, asked one, did I, in my previous post, nominate all adopters as potential recipients of the "Demons in Adoption" award? Was I not damning them all (painting them all with the same brush) and refusing to note those whose hearts were "in the right place?" Was I not doing to them what they do to us when they characterize us mothers as sluts and promiscuous tramps?

No, not really. We first look at the engine that runs the industry. Adopters are the fuel, the gas and oil that keeps the pistons pumping and the camshaft rotating. Without adopters, without people wanting to take the children of others and make them "as if their own," the engine would falter and cease running. You have to have both supply AND DEMAND in order to keep any Industry alive.

I know quite a few people who have adopted. Some, I have known for years. Without exception, I have watched these people, good and kind folk for the most part, change in a way that was fascinating and appalling. I watched the sense of entitlement, the lack of compassion for the mother of the child they coveted and the denial of any problems associated with adoption separation for the child emerge in people who were, formerly, very caring to any and all.

It has nothing, really, to do with their outward character and more to do with the inability to see the pain and suffering. While the adopter celebrates the acquisition of the child, someone, somewhere, is usually suffering a singular kind of grief. It is also difficult for them to get past that tabula rasa depiction of the human infant so they do not want to acknowledge the pre-verbal mourning of the child they have acquired.

Some do, eventually, get it and they and the Industry scurry like roaches when the lights come on, trying to formulate an answer that does anything but lead back to their role in the separation of mother and child. There are learned papers on how to help the child overcome their trauma. This has led to such barbaric practices as "re-birthing," which has led to the death of a child, and various "diagnoses" of RAD and even ADD.

The Industry has gone to such extremes to condition the public in order to serve the needs of adopters and make their profit, that there is now the new, improved, brainwashed beemommie who writes posts of sugary joy about her loss on the Internet to make these child-covetors feel better about their role in the separation. I wonder what would happen if just one set of PAPs were to tell the wide-eyed mother-to be that she didn't HAVE to surrender her child? What if (and this is a stretch, I know) they were to offer, instead, their help in keeping the mother and child together and on their feet? I have an outrageous picture in my mind of Industry minions roaring up in a black van with side doors open, sweeping the offending PAPs inside and taking them back to headquarters for more "conditioning." Well, I do have an imagination.

Some people argue that there would be abused, neglected children and overflowing orphanages if there were not adopters. The fact of the matter is that there would be abused, neglected children whether there were adopters or not. In fact, if anyone has watched the news or read the newspapers or online news services  within the past couple of decades, then they know that even adopters have been known to abuse and neglect. And orphanages get a bad rap. I have been in one where there were happy, clean, well-fed children and conscientious, loving guardians. We've been brainwashed by Annie and Oliver in our view of group care for children.

And poverty as a reason to "rescue a child" is as illogical as the two-parent family argument. We didn't have much money when I was growing up, but we always had something to eat and the knowledge of who we were and the love of our mother. I know many people of my parents' generation who grew up in the Great Depression and ate a lot of beans but they were loved and became responsible citizens when they grew to adulthood. Adopters are just as vulnerable to the recession as any of the rest of us and they are also just as prone to divorce, affairs and other pitfalls of life. And one has to wonder how many adopted children are turned over to Nannies to be raised while the adopters pursue success in their careers.

In any event, the people who adopt and have adopted are, for the most part, not idiots. I KNOW that the adopters from the closed, secret era were totally aware of the attitudes towards and the treatment of the unwed mother. You cannot convince me that adopters are ignorant of the pain that is being caused to the mother and to the child by this unnatural separation. But we humans are great at self-justification. The smarter we are, the more easily we justify. The waters of the river of Denial are wide and deep. That brings me back to the issue of stereotyping. We observe and see what adopting does to people. Adopters and others stereotype us as a means of justifying the taking of our children.

So I stand fast in my nomination of adopters as a group as possible recipients of the DIA award. I doubt that they will win it because there are too many people wanting to be "fair." But they will always be at the top of my list. The Industry is soulless. It is a venture of the Capitalistic variety. And adopters use this Industry to fill an emotional desire. It's not even a personal put-down of those who adopt. It's just pure, bottom-line logic.

The Adoption Industry and Adopters ~You can't have one without the other.


Stephanie said...

I am absolutely with you on this, Robin, 100%. The people who adopted my son cared not one bit how it affected me and my child. All they cared about were there own selfish desires of being parents, at the expense of myself and my family.

Even after having their own biological child a few years after adopting my son, they were still selfish and self entitled with the child the coveted that was not theirs, but MY child. They were so selfish and self entitled that they stopped communicating with me, period, when my son was only 7, after they PROMISED me they would not do that to me.

Anyone who say's that adoptive parents are not perpetuating this crime of (in)humanity towards mothers and their children, due to their desire to become parents at ALL costs, need to think again. It sure wasn't my duty to provide a "supposed" infertile woman with my infant son. It's not anyone's duty.

It is not also not anyone's right to think they deserve a young, vulnerable woman's child just because she finds herself with an unexpected pregnancy. As far as I am concerned, they are doing nothing but taking advantage of a situation and helping themselves to someone's child, who is in no way able to make an informed decision in such a short period of time (the whopping 48-72 hours after birth).

Sandy Young said...

Robin, this is excellent! I absolutely agree with every word. I have also seen the changes in people who adopt, going from perfectly nice, normal people to folks who perpetuate the lies. It changes them, fundamentally.

There's none so blind as he who WILL not see. I think that they often REFUSE to allow their minds to "go there" and fully note the power of the pain of the mothers. This is human nature at its less than stellar best. Humans cannot bear to visit the pain that they cause, so the mind skits away to the more pleasant and adopter-friendly Industry view.

Cassi said...


As one who has adoptive moms I not only like but hold a great respect for in their ability to see beyond the experience they know, I still agree with you 100%, without an ounce of hesitance!

There would have never been, and would not still be today such a drastic need for supply if it were not for the hungry demand that seems to only grow stronger and greater with time!

Carlynne said...

I absolutely agree with you Robin. Don't you think there is a difference though between adopters of infants, adopters of older children from foster care and adopters adopting their spouse's children?

I see the adopters of infants as the real demand behind the supply.

Robin said...

Not really, Carlynne. In every incidence it is about erasing the past and heritage of the child. JMO
Foster care might make a difference, but, for a lot of adopters, adopting infants and toddlers out of foster care is the way to get a baby on the cheap. The older kids still seem to just make the rounds until they age out.

Lily said...

Thanks Robin for a great article the only losers in all of this is mother and child adopters lose nothing never have never wil thier greatest insecurity is that the adopted child wil retrun to its mother when able, so the necessary brain washing and gratitude for the adopters must begin from acquisition, what "normal" family relationship is hell bent on destruction of self? They have to destroy the mother for the adoption to be successful, Dr Geoff Rickarby says only 2 word define adption lies and conspiracy

Chris said...

I always think quite curious those adoptive mothers who proclaim understanding, compassion and empathy for the("our") *birth mother AFTER they have adopted the infant. Those adoptive mothers who proclaim they 'get it' and then offer themselves up as the 'good' adoptive mommy. Well, how nice that is (and quite convenient) ...now they have all this understanding but ONLY AFTER they acquired the infant/toddler thru adoption as part of their 'forever family'.
And I agree Robin...many fost-to-adopters are also trolling foster care for that infant or toddler "on the cheap". I have read at a particular forum where these fost-to-adopters give each other advice in how to get that infant/toddler thru foster care, because the adoption route is just too expensive for them. Foster care is now the Back Door for infant/toddler adoption, at Bargain Basement discounts...many who will also receive an adoption welfare check until the kid reaches 18. Foster care in many states now is privatized. Private adoption agencies once only in the business of selling womb-fresh straight out..now are in the business of foster care, who receive lots of $$$$$$ from federal & state coffers to place tikes for adoption. Like you said, Robin...it's still the older kids that languish in foster care..adopters now troll thru foster care for as new as possible kids...on the cheap! And that ain't no lie either.. Adoption in America is top-heavy with corruption, greed, and very self-serving.

Lori said...

@Robin: you said "The older kids still seem to just make the rounds until they age out." So I have to ask, what if a person just wanted to adopt older kids. Kids who were and are their own person? After all, I aged out of care, so I know the other half of that equation and it makes me curious.

Robin said...

@Lori...I guess I will sound worse than the Grinch, but I would rather see foster care improved and incorporate legal guardianships than see even older children having their surnames changed and the load of gratitude laid on their shoulders. Adoption remains a legal lie, no matter who is adopted or their age. This is just my opinion.

Jen said...

Very good post! I <3 your blog!

Sandy Young said...

No, Robin, it is not just your opinion. I share it. Our foster care system is broken beyond repair and as long as money is at the root of it, so it shall remain. A social service cannot be a money making operation. The two things are mutually exclusive.

carol said...

Robin, this is another wonderful post – thank you.

…but I wonder about this, “adopters are ignorant of the pain that is being caused to the mother and to the child by this unnatural separation.”

I believe some are aware of it logically, but NONE can experience it at the visceral level that mothers and their adopted sons and daughters feel and live with every day. They don’t and can’t know how that accumulated confusion, grief, anger, pain, etc., effects mothers and their children over the years.

Some may recognize that there is pain involved, but they do not feel OUR pain, and only occasionally allow themselves to glimpse it. Through logic and not through a physical experience, they "know* that they can fix “it” (adoption and the adoptee) if they just parent this way or that: it is dangerous circular thinking. And for sure, they still don’t give a damn about the mother who loses her child. There is no acknowledgement of what a healthy community might look and feel like – only their observations of themselves – the insular “community”.

I think that those who allow themselves to feel even a sliver of the wooden stake plowed through our hearts spend a lot of time on their knees praying to their god that “their” a-kid loves them “more”.

Anyway, maybe I’m talking out my ass, but I don’t think so. I imagine that the good adopters think, “oh adoption can’t be bad because --- that would mean I fucked up! And I can’t possibly be a fuck-up!” We all know what the people with good intentions – adopters and their representatives - have been doing all along…paving the road to hell so at least they don’t feel any bumps.

I agree with you. I nominate ALL adoptive parents. Let them suck it for awhile.

Robin said...

I think, Carol, that you are right and I was thinking along those same lines with my post. There are some things that can't be understood unless one tries to understand (which most adopters won't) or one has experienced the same thing.

sfpace said...

Robin, this is an excellent post. Thanks for your clear, cogent statements.