Adoption Is A Feminist Issue, But Not For The Reasons You Think
April 21, 2017 9:12 AM Subscribe
In their efforts to cure what they see as a moral crisis infecting our nation, the anti-choice movement has historically thrown their power, money, and influence behind their two favorite antidotes to abortion: abstinence-only education and adoption. In any era when reproductive rights are being rolled back, as they are now, feminists need to get stronger and clearer about where we stand and what we’re fighting for. We all know, both from data and from common sense, that abstinence education is not only a failure but wildly detrimental to the health and safety of young people. But there doesn’t yet seem to be a broader understanding, even in the mainstream feminist and pro-choice movements, that promoting adoption has its problems too.
This point is so often forgotten and is worth repeating again and again:
Here’s a truth that can be hard to hear: Adoption is a trauma. The separation of parents and children, the dismantling of families, even at birth, is very often traumatic and can result in enormous amounts of suffering and lifelong consequences for first parents and adoptees, as well as the families and communities to which they belong.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 9:32 AM on April 21, 2017 [14 favorites]
Here’s a truth that can be hard to hear: Adoption is a trauma. The separation of parents and children, the dismantling of families, even at birth, is very often traumatic and can result in enormous amounts of suffering and lifelong consequences for first parents and adoptees, as well as the families and communities to which they belong.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 9:32 AM on April 21, 2017 [14 favorites]
My wife is Executive Director for a local adoption agency (an all-woman staff, btw) and the pressure they get from evangelicals and the anti-choice crowd is pretty intense. The agency can't so much as leave materials at a Planned Parenthood office because the anti-choice groups will raise hell over it. And, given that the vast majority of their adoptive couples tend to be pretty religious, the threat to the agency's viability is very real. They can't even touch adoption by gay couples because of these groups.
posted by Thorzdad at 9:33 AM on April 21, 2017 [5 favorites]
posted by Thorzdad at 9:33 AM on April 21, 2017 [5 favorites]
The agency can't so much as leave materials at a Planned Parenthood office because the anti-choice groups will raise hell over it.
Wait, what?
posted by Etrigan at 9:36 AM on April 21, 2017 [14 favorites]
Wait, what?
posted by Etrigan at 9:36 AM on April 21, 2017 [14 favorites]
Etrigan, the vast majority of the adoptive couples are pretty religious and the anti-choice groups would get word out to churches that the agency works with PP, which is the devil incarnate in their eyes. There are covert ways around this, but the agency has to tread very carefully.
posted by Thorzdad at 9:40 AM on April 21, 2017 [8 favorites]
posted by Thorzdad at 9:40 AM on April 21, 2017 [8 favorites]
Etrigan, the vast majority of the adoptive couples are pretty religious and the anti-choice groups would get word out to churches that the agency works with PP, which is the devil incarnate in their eyes.
Ugh. I was afraid of that. The people who claim that they'd rather see babies adopted than aborted are pissed because someone's trying to do that very thing? I wish I were surprised. I really do.
posted by Etrigan at 9:42 AM on April 21, 2017 [40 favorites]
Ugh. I was afraid of that. The people who claim that they'd rather see babies adopted than aborted are pissed because someone's trying to do that very thing? I wish I were surprised. I really do.
posted by Etrigan at 9:42 AM on April 21, 2017 [40 favorites]
It seems paradoxical if you take the anti-abortionists at their word that their goal is to eliminate abortions. If, however, you work from the premise that their goal is to punish people for Being Evil (e.g., in any way interacting with Planned Parenthood, because it is the Enemy), it's entirely consistent.
Their anger is not about beliefs, behavior, or outcomes. It's about identity.
posted by biogeo at 9:48 AM on April 21, 2017 [46 favorites]
Their anger is not about beliefs, behavior, or outcomes. It's about identity.
posted by biogeo at 9:48 AM on April 21, 2017 [46 favorites]
The fact is, most people who relinquish their children for adoption or have their children taken away from them, both in the U.S. and internationally, do so as a result of economic and racial injustice.This is probably true for other choices women are forced to make, also. I have often wished there were a widely-supported program that evangelical Christians, and other sincere religious people, could support that focused on these underlying problems rather than solutions that some women feel they must make.
posted by amtho at 9:50 AM on April 21, 2017 [3 favorites]
I have often wished there were a widely-supported program that evangelical Christians, and other sincere religious people, could support that focused on these underlying problems rather than solutions that some women feel they must make.
There is, the secular liberal welfare state.
posted by biogeo at 9:54 AM on April 21, 2017 [60 favorites]
There is, the secular liberal welfare state.
posted by biogeo at 9:54 AM on April 21, 2017 [60 favorites]
My first job after I graduated from college was at a local Planned Parenthood clinic. I started as a Family Planning Specialist. We FPSs did all the front office medical stuff (making appointments, taking payments, answering the phones, etc.) plus we counseled women and men about birth control options, STDs, safer sex, and yes, pregnancy counseling. If someone came in and had a positive pregnancy test, we talked about ALL of their options, including parenting and what social services were available to them.
I was promoted to Crisis Pregnancy Counselor in my second year, which meant that I saw the women (and sometimes their partners) who were seriously NOT planning on being pregnant but ended up that way anyway. I had extensive meetings with my clients where we would really explore what it meant to parent (including all the resources available), to terminate, or to adopt out. 9 times out of 10, my clients chose to parent. The others chose to terminate. I never had one person choose adoption.
I remember one woman coming to us after she had been to one of those evil, secretly religious crisis pregnancy centers. She came to us because she was pretty sure she was going to terminate but she wasn't given any information about that option at the pregnancy center, only adoption. After our first meeting, where we talked at length about social services available to her, and adoption and termination, she came to me again and said she decided to parent. She had no idea that things like WIC existed, and she didn't know anything about all the other social services our town and government offered (including the prenatal clinic run by the Planned Parenthood in the next town over). She was grateful because she was able to go to her parents and present a detailed plan of action and they were going to support her decision. I saw her at the grocery store a couple years later (didn't say anything to her), with her little girl, and while we can never know what goes on behind closed doors, they both seemed healthy and happy.
And yet, just because Planned Parenthood offers pregnancy termination (a still legal medical procedure, mind you), the religious right thinks it's an evil, immoral organization. When I tell my stories to those people, they honestly think I'm lying. Planned Parenthood giving any other services except abortion?? Planned Parenthood running a prenatal clinic?? LIES! ALL LIES!
I loved that job. I really felt like I was doing some good in the world.
posted by cooker girl at 9:57 AM on April 21, 2017 [147 favorites]
I was promoted to Crisis Pregnancy Counselor in my second year, which meant that I saw the women (and sometimes their partners) who were seriously NOT planning on being pregnant but ended up that way anyway. I had extensive meetings with my clients where we would really explore what it meant to parent (including all the resources available), to terminate, or to adopt out. 9 times out of 10, my clients chose to parent. The others chose to terminate. I never had one person choose adoption.
I remember one woman coming to us after she had been to one of those evil, secretly religious crisis pregnancy centers. She came to us because she was pretty sure she was going to terminate but she wasn't given any information about that option at the pregnancy center, only adoption. After our first meeting, where we talked at length about social services available to her, and adoption and termination, she came to me again and said she decided to parent. She had no idea that things like WIC existed, and she didn't know anything about all the other social services our town and government offered (including the prenatal clinic run by the Planned Parenthood in the next town over). She was grateful because she was able to go to her parents and present a detailed plan of action and they were going to support her decision. I saw her at the grocery store a couple years later (didn't say anything to her), with her little girl, and while we can never know what goes on behind closed doors, they both seemed healthy and happy.
And yet, just because Planned Parenthood offers pregnancy termination (a still legal medical procedure, mind you), the religious right thinks it's an evil, immoral organization. When I tell my stories to those people, they honestly think I'm lying. Planned Parenthood giving any other services except abortion?? Planned Parenthood running a prenatal clinic?? LIES! ALL LIES!
I loved that job. I really felt like I was doing some good in the world.
posted by cooker girl at 9:57 AM on April 21, 2017 [147 favorites]
Adoption is not a solution for pregnancy.
posted by agregoli at 10:08 AM on April 21, 2017 [13 favorites]
posted by agregoli at 10:08 AM on April 21, 2017 [13 favorites]
I have some family members who are extremely against abortion and are very Catholic. They are currently on a wait-list for adoption after a bout with cancer left them without the ability to have more children after their first.
They are good parents. I love them, but the way they talk about the adoption experience from the birth mother's perspective just makes me livid. They minimize just how taxing pregnancy is, the long term physical issues that result from giving birth. It's just one crappy day of pushing and then that person is free to live their life.
When my daughter was born she was diagnosed with jaundice and placed in an incubator under bilirubin lights. I paced like an animal next to her box because I couldn't hold her. And I could see her through clear plastic walls the whole time. I can only imagine the pain that would come from being separated from the person who had been growing inside me for months. That feeling must stick with many women for a lifetime and it makes me incandescent with rage that this is something that gets swept away because most people don't want to think about the moral ambiguity of adoption.
I think adoption is a viable option for some people, but we don't talk about its real cost in western society. Then there's the fact that maternity insurance could cost 17K on top of a bare-bones policy if certain legislators get their way. WTF America?
posted by Alison at 10:18 AM on April 21, 2017 [24 favorites]
They are good parents. I love them, but the way they talk about the adoption experience from the birth mother's perspective just makes me livid. They minimize just how taxing pregnancy is, the long term physical issues that result from giving birth. It's just one crappy day of pushing and then that person is free to live their life.
When my daughter was born she was diagnosed with jaundice and placed in an incubator under bilirubin lights. I paced like an animal next to her box because I couldn't hold her. And I could see her through clear plastic walls the whole time. I can only imagine the pain that would come from being separated from the person who had been growing inside me for months. That feeling must stick with many women for a lifetime and it makes me incandescent with rage that this is something that gets swept away because most people don't want to think about the moral ambiguity of adoption.
I think adoption is a viable option for some people, but we don't talk about its real cost in western society. Then there's the fact that maternity insurance could cost 17K on top of a bare-bones policy if certain legislators get their way. WTF America?
posted by Alison at 10:18 AM on April 21, 2017 [24 favorites]
I love them, but the way they talk about the adoption experience from the birth mother's perspective just makes me livid. They minimize just how taxing pregnancy is, the long term physical issues that result from giving birth. It's just one crappy day of pushing and then that person is free to live their life.
It's maddening how many adoptive couples come in with similar attitudes toward the birth mothers. My wife's agency was created with the birth mother at the center of their work, and they go to great lengths (though mandatory classes) to drum into the adoptive couples the truth about what the mothers are going through and experiencing. It can often be an uphill struggle to get them to "get it" especially, oddly, with younger adoptive couples.
posted by Thorzdad at 10:24 AM on April 21, 2017 [9 favorites]
It's maddening how many adoptive couples come in with similar attitudes toward the birth mothers. My wife's agency was created with the birth mother at the center of their work, and they go to great lengths (though mandatory classes) to drum into the adoptive couples the truth about what the mothers are going through and experiencing. It can often be an uphill struggle to get them to "get it" especially, oddly, with younger adoptive couples.
posted by Thorzdad at 10:24 AM on April 21, 2017 [9 favorites]
Adoption is not a solution for pregnancy.
When pregnancy needs a solution, it's not a problem, it's a symptom.
posted by Etrigan at 10:26 AM on April 21, 2017 [1 favorite]
When pregnancy needs a solution, it's not a problem, it's a symptom.
posted by Etrigan at 10:26 AM on April 21, 2017 [1 favorite]
I am an adoptive parent. After meeting with Catholic Charities and reading up some other national adoption agencies, we decided to use a local non-profit agency, Adoptions Together, which works for "all families." One of the things we really liked about AT is that placement fees help pay for counseling and services for prospective birth parents *even if they eventually do not go forward with an adoption plan*. In 2016, they counseled 270 expectant parents, but placed only 36 infants with adoptive families. We appreciated their efforts to help families figure out what would work for them, including helping them to apply for social assistance, even if it meant we waited longer. The first statement, in bold, on their "Considering Adoption?" page is "No adoption agency should ever pressure you to choose adoption." We found this to be a very different approach than some of the other agencies we looked at, but it sounds similar to Thorzdad's wife's agency.
posted by candyland at 10:26 AM on April 21, 2017 [28 favorites]
posted by candyland at 10:26 AM on April 21, 2017 [28 favorites]
How common are open adoptions these days? And do they help with the trauma the mother experiences? The only couple I know who have adopted have an open adoption with the first/birth (not sure of the terminology) a regular part of the child's life.
posted by Hactar at 10:29 AM on April 21, 2017
posted by Hactar at 10:29 AM on April 21, 2017
Adoption is not a solution for pregnancy.
When pregnancy needs a solution, it's not a problem, it's a symptom.
I have no idea what you mean, Etrigan.
When someone is pregnant and needs to find "a solution", then there are problems that led to that pregnancy that are as important, if not more so, than the pregnancy itself -- rape, lack of sex ed, lack of choices...
posted by Etrigan at 10:32 AM on April 21, 2017 [1 favorite]
When pregnancy needs a solution, it's not a problem, it's a symptom.
I have no idea what you mean, Etrigan.
When someone is pregnant and needs to find "a solution", then there are problems that led to that pregnancy that are as important, if not more so, than the pregnancy itself -- rape, lack of sex ed, lack of choices...
posted by Etrigan at 10:32 AM on April 21, 2017 [1 favorite]
How common are open adoptions these days?
My wife's agency insists on it.
And do they help with the trauma the mother experiences?
Overall, the experiences seem to say "yes", at least in their experience. It seems to be a positive thing for both birth mothers and the adoptive families.
posted by Thorzdad at 10:33 AM on April 21, 2017 [1 favorite]
My wife's agency insists on it.
And do they help with the trauma the mother experiences?
Overall, the experiences seem to say "yes", at least in their experience. It seems to be a positive thing for both birth mothers and the adoptive families.
posted by Thorzdad at 10:33 AM on April 21, 2017 [1 favorite]
I read this the other day, and maybe I read it too fast, but I didn't totally understand why this is something that specifically feminists need to address. (I mean, aside from the fact that literally everything is a feminist issue, and this is about the intersection of capitalism and women's rights.) Isn't this an everyone issue? In fact it seems MORE like an anti-choice issue--those people are more pushing adoption than feminists are, as far as I can tell.
posted by pipti at 10:34 AM on April 21, 2017
posted by pipti at 10:34 AM on April 21, 2017
Well....yes. Of course? Doesn't change that pregnancy would be a huge problem for me and some people telling me to seek adoption wouldn't solve my very-much-not-wanting-to-be-pregnant issue. Which is part of why forced-birthers don't get it.
posted by agregoli at 10:42 AM on April 21, 2017 [4 favorites]
posted by agregoli at 10:42 AM on April 21, 2017 [4 favorites]
From the article: "Here’s an even harder truth: The adoption industry is a business. It generates billions of dollars each year and requires other people’s children in order to stay profitable."
This is structurally very similiar to the accusation made against Planned Parenthood by anti-abortionists. I thought, there must be nonprofits for adoptions, and came across this almost immediately:
www.adoptionbirthmothers.com/the-non-profit-adoption-agency-myth
.. which contained numbers that put me in mind of the Lone Biker of the Apocalypse, from Raising Arizona: "Price. A fair price. That's not what you say it is, and it's not what I say it is... It's what the market will bear. Now there's people - and I know 'em - who'll pay a lot more than $25,000 for a healthy baby. Why, I myself fetched $30,000 on the black market. And that was in 1954 dollars."
I think there is money to be followed.
posted by the Real Dan at 11:10 AM on April 21, 2017 [4 favorites]
This is structurally very similiar to the accusation made against Planned Parenthood by anti-abortionists. I thought, there must be nonprofits for adoptions, and came across this almost immediately:
www.adoptionbirthmothers.com/the-non-profit-adoption-agency-myth
.. which contained numbers that put me in mind of the Lone Biker of the Apocalypse, from Raising Arizona: "Price. A fair price. That's not what you say it is, and it's not what I say it is... It's what the market will bear. Now there's people - and I know 'em - who'll pay a lot more than $25,000 for a healthy baby. Why, I myself fetched $30,000 on the black market. And that was in 1954 dollars."
I think there is money to be followed.
posted by the Real Dan at 11:10 AM on April 21, 2017 [4 favorites]
I am a birthmother and adoption reform activist for 40 years, and this article rings absolutely true to me. My "baby" is 49 (yikes!) and a wonderful caring man who devotes much of his time to environmental activism. His adoptive home was not so good, but he came through miraculously ok. We have been reunited many years; his adoptive parents have passed away. My surrendering him was something that never should have happened; as this article said, when there is only one choice there is no choice, and adoption was the only choice presented to countless women like me, in the past and up to the present. Thankfully numbers are much smaller now, but naive and vulnerable young moms who fall into the clutches of religious fanatics or those making a lucrative profit from adoptions still are railroaded into the "only one choice" dilemma.
We in adoption reform circles have been trying for years to get feminists to see our issue as one of exploitation of women, but by and large this has not happened. Ms. Magazine scathingly blew off birthmothers trying to get them to look at our issue years ago, and it has not improved since. I was so delighted to see this article by an adopted women laying it all out there for her feminist readers.
It is for the reasons described in the article, that well-off white women, including many feminist leaders, are those who benefit from adoption, and from their classist position feel that they are raising our poor little bastards to a higher standard of living and consciousness by adopting. Their sense of entitlement to other mother's children is sickening. They love to believe that surrendering mothers have a real choice and choose to give their children away with no pressure, and mostly have not wanted to hear otherwise from those of us who have lived it. Nor do they want to hear from those like me who for personal reasons did not want an abortion, so Roe V. Wade did not solve that problem for all women. I am not against compassionate adoptive parents of which there are many, nor the whole idea of adoption, but the difficulties we have had with getting feminist groups and leaders to see our issue as worthy are real and must be addressed.
For the adoptee point of view, look into Bastard Nation, and read the books of the late Betty Jean Lifton. For birthmother's stories, read "The Girls Who Went Away" by Ann Fessler, and check out Concerned United Birthparents. There are also many other books, blogs, websites and groups giving the other side of adoption as always the best choice and a win-win situation for all.
posted by mermayd at 11:34 AM on April 21, 2017 [35 favorites]
We in adoption reform circles have been trying for years to get feminists to see our issue as one of exploitation of women, but by and large this has not happened. Ms. Magazine scathingly blew off birthmothers trying to get them to look at our issue years ago, and it has not improved since. I was so delighted to see this article by an adopted women laying it all out there for her feminist readers.
It is for the reasons described in the article, that well-off white women, including many feminist leaders, are those who benefit from adoption, and from their classist position feel that they are raising our poor little bastards to a higher standard of living and consciousness by adopting. Their sense of entitlement to other mother's children is sickening. They love to believe that surrendering mothers have a real choice and choose to give their children away with no pressure, and mostly have not wanted to hear otherwise from those of us who have lived it. Nor do they want to hear from those like me who for personal reasons did not want an abortion, so Roe V. Wade did not solve that problem for all women. I am not against compassionate adoptive parents of which there are many, nor the whole idea of adoption, but the difficulties we have had with getting feminist groups and leaders to see our issue as worthy are real and must be addressed.
For the adoptee point of view, look into Bastard Nation, and read the books of the late Betty Jean Lifton. For birthmother's stories, read "The Girls Who Went Away" by Ann Fessler, and check out Concerned United Birthparents. There are also many other books, blogs, websites and groups giving the other side of adoption as always the best choice and a win-win situation for all.
posted by mermayd at 11:34 AM on April 21, 2017 [35 favorites]
I was told that my aunt who I've never met was adopted after civil war in SE Asia, so this global poverty/inequality mentioned in the article really strikes home. She was whisked away to some country in Europe and my uncles--can you imagine being them--never saw her again.
I'd think an open adoption policy is the least unethical. But as the article says, it's the ideological way that "choice" becomes a kind of propaganda by obscuring the social processes; that is the ethical test, and that's a very general, extensible notion.
posted by polymodus at 12:11 PM on April 21, 2017 [1 favorite]
I'd think an open adoption policy is the least unethical. But as the article says, it's the ideological way that "choice" becomes a kind of propaganda by obscuring the social processes; that is the ethical test, and that's a very general, extensible notion.
posted by polymodus at 12:11 PM on April 21, 2017 [1 favorite]
I turned 51 this year and have been in a developing, happily positive, reunion with my birthmother and extended family for about four years now. I was completely blindsided that she and her family would expect to develop a familial relationship with me and quite psychologically unprepared for it - my adult psychology has always been about minimizing intimate social contact. As a child I fantasized about becoming an asteroid miner because according to the childhood propaganda of the day we were headed to space.
(I was born in Arizona, a closed-records state. I initiated my search primarily because there was an outside possibility that my birth family were UK citizens and that would have qualified me for dual citizenship. The search was indirectly catalyzed by our own beloved Bunny Sparber, AstroZombie himself, discussing aspects of his infant adoption that echoed mine.)
I wanted to do the right thing, the morally correct thing, with respect to meeting my birth family, which to me meant being open to their expectations and needs and approaching the experience as one would a trip to a foreign country or a visit to an acquaintance's home, with an expectation of goodwill and with positive intent. It seems to be working out OK, although I am grateful for the continent's distance between us.
As a part of my trying to learn what the correct moral action in this matter was I both sought adult-adoptee counseling and joined an adult-adoptee support group. Over time, I have found very large groups on Facebook oriented primarily to facilitating adoptee reunion and to providing a safe online community for adoptees in reunion to openly discuss the extremely challenging emotional experience associated with reunion.
In my support group of about fifteen people, none of us are products of open adoption, yet - we are all a little bit too old for it. Three of us are overseas adoptees, two from Columbia and one from China. Most of us are in reunion. About half of us are POC. There is a diversity of experience with regard to our reunions. Some of us have experienced rejection by our birth mothers. Some of us have found that even seeking reunion has led our adoptive parents to reject us. About three weeks ago, one of us, a brilliant and deeply compassionate social worker who was of Oceanian heritage and whose career was focused on working with Native Americans, died in his bed of a heroin overdose. About a year ago another of us deliberately committed suicide using some form of prescription.
The group's founder embraces an adoptee-experience text called "The Primal Wound," by Nancy Verrier, which is controversial in and out of the adoptee community for various reasons but which is the most influential book on the subject of how and why adoptee psychology can be so different from non-adoptee psychology. I find the book somewhat unconvincing in what I understand to be its' central hypothesis but extremely useful in illuminating aspects of my own worldview and perceptions.
My summary, of the book, undoubtedly slanted: there is a Jungian connection between birthmother and child that is severed in a damaging way in the contemporary practice of Western adoption, in which the relinquished child is raised by persons biologically unrelated to the parent, and this damage is exacerbated by infant separation from the birth mother over the first few days of life in ways that may be biological and permanent.
My own opinion is that it is unnecessary to ascribe Jungian connection or permanent biological damage to infant adoptees to account for our different viewpoint of and experience in the world.
Whether or not our birthmothers have been able to verbally express the viewpoint that they were coerced into relinquishment, when we have been able to learn the stories of our birthmothers, in the majority of instances it seem quite clear that our participation in what can only be described as a marketplace was not simply involuntary on our part but that our birthmothers understood themselves to have been in a restricted-choice situation.
posted by mwhybark at 12:19 PM on April 21, 2017 [14 favorites]
(I was born in Arizona, a closed-records state. I initiated my search primarily because there was an outside possibility that my birth family were UK citizens and that would have qualified me for dual citizenship. The search was indirectly catalyzed by our own beloved Bunny Sparber, AstroZombie himself, discussing aspects of his infant adoption that echoed mine.)
I wanted to do the right thing, the morally correct thing, with respect to meeting my birth family, which to me meant being open to their expectations and needs and approaching the experience as one would a trip to a foreign country or a visit to an acquaintance's home, with an expectation of goodwill and with positive intent. It seems to be working out OK, although I am grateful for the continent's distance between us.
As a part of my trying to learn what the correct moral action in this matter was I both sought adult-adoptee counseling and joined an adult-adoptee support group. Over time, I have found very large groups on Facebook oriented primarily to facilitating adoptee reunion and to providing a safe online community for adoptees in reunion to openly discuss the extremely challenging emotional experience associated with reunion.
In my support group of about fifteen people, none of us are products of open adoption, yet - we are all a little bit too old for it. Three of us are overseas adoptees, two from Columbia and one from China. Most of us are in reunion. About half of us are POC. There is a diversity of experience with regard to our reunions. Some of us have experienced rejection by our birth mothers. Some of us have found that even seeking reunion has led our adoptive parents to reject us. About three weeks ago, one of us, a brilliant and deeply compassionate social worker who was of Oceanian heritage and whose career was focused on working with Native Americans, died in his bed of a heroin overdose. About a year ago another of us deliberately committed suicide using some form of prescription.
The group's founder embraces an adoptee-experience text called "The Primal Wound," by Nancy Verrier, which is controversial in and out of the adoptee community for various reasons but which is the most influential book on the subject of how and why adoptee psychology can be so different from non-adoptee psychology. I find the book somewhat unconvincing in what I understand to be its' central hypothesis but extremely useful in illuminating aspects of my own worldview and perceptions.
My summary, of the book, undoubtedly slanted: there is a Jungian connection between birthmother and child that is severed in a damaging way in the contemporary practice of Western adoption, in which the relinquished child is raised by persons biologically unrelated to the parent, and this damage is exacerbated by infant separation from the birth mother over the first few days of life in ways that may be biological and permanent.
My own opinion is that it is unnecessary to ascribe Jungian connection or permanent biological damage to infant adoptees to account for our different viewpoint of and experience in the world.
Whether or not our birthmothers have been able to verbally express the viewpoint that they were coerced into relinquishment, when we have been able to learn the stories of our birthmothers, in the majority of instances it seem quite clear that our participation in what can only be described as a marketplace was not simply involuntary on our part but that our birthmothers understood themselves to have been in a restricted-choice situation.
posted by mwhybark at 12:19 PM on April 21, 2017 [14 favorites]
I should note that one of our Columbian adoptees, against all odds, recently found her birth mother. Another has shared with the group that her adoptive parents were explicit and open with her about their preference for an overseas adoption - they understood it to mean that she (and her birth parents) would have a harder time locating each other. Our Chinese adoptee has been attending group less frequently as the number of us in reunion increases.
posted by mwhybark at 12:22 PM on April 21, 2017 [2 favorites]
posted by mwhybark at 12:22 PM on April 21, 2017 [2 favorites]
Thanks for posting this and for everyone who commented. I have for a long time smelled something suspicious about adoption - the race/economic issues, etc. But reading the line about how traumatic adoption can be immediately reminded me of reading ta nehisi coates' work (I read "Between the World and Me" and "The Case for Reparations" in one go so I don't remember which) where he talks about how families were split by slave owners, tearing them apart...
posted by rebent at 12:25 PM on April 21, 2017 [4 favorites]
posted by rebent at 12:25 PM on April 21, 2017 [4 favorites]
Adoption is a feminist issue because it concerns the rights of women (and their children) in regards to giving birth/raising a child, and because abuse and coercion of birth mothers is a longstanding and well-documented phenomenon.
Because birth belongs uniquely to women/people with uteruses, it has been weaponized to exploit and oppress women in a thousand different ways. Even if you never give a child up for adoption, you learn during pregnancy and birth all the ways that your body is regarded as a sort of communal property, and your child only "yours" by the blessing of the state/your own privilege. The less privileged you are, the more constrained your choices and the harsher the penalties if someone decides that you have acted wrongly. Up to and including losing your children. Women who have refused c-sections have been threatened with jail; women are tested for drugs automatically during pregnancy; women have been prosecuted for stillbirths or miscarriages.
I'm pretty sure it was some of ya'll posting here about previous adoption-related threads that made me really start questioning the ethics of adoption in general, and the role of colonialism and racism when it comes to adopting kids from abroad, and how some of us see children as property that we have the right to demand, and if we can't make our own, to obtain from others less worthy/more desperate.
I still struggle with how to think of this when on the other side, are people I know who have dealt with infertility, or who have adopted children, who are good people. I feel I can't stand in front of them and condemn them. Some children's lives are saved by adoption because they had nowhere else to go. Some women do choose adoption willingly. But with all these unspoken powerful forces at play around women's bodies and reproduction, it can be really hard to know what kinds of coercion might be in play.
posted by emjaybee at 1:10 PM on April 21, 2017 [24 favorites]
Because birth belongs uniquely to women/people with uteruses, it has been weaponized to exploit and oppress women in a thousand different ways. Even if you never give a child up for adoption, you learn during pregnancy and birth all the ways that your body is regarded as a sort of communal property, and your child only "yours" by the blessing of the state/your own privilege. The less privileged you are, the more constrained your choices and the harsher the penalties if someone decides that you have acted wrongly. Up to and including losing your children. Women who have refused c-sections have been threatened with jail; women are tested for drugs automatically during pregnancy; women have been prosecuted for stillbirths or miscarriages.
I'm pretty sure it was some of ya'll posting here about previous adoption-related threads that made me really start questioning the ethics of adoption in general, and the role of colonialism and racism when it comes to adopting kids from abroad, and how some of us see children as property that we have the right to demand, and if we can't make our own, to obtain from others less worthy/more desperate.
I still struggle with how to think of this when on the other side, are people I know who have dealt with infertility, or who have adopted children, who are good people. I feel I can't stand in front of them and condemn them. Some children's lives are saved by adoption because they had nowhere else to go. Some women do choose adoption willingly. But with all these unspoken powerful forces at play around women's bodies and reproduction, it can be really hard to know what kinds of coercion might be in play.
posted by emjaybee at 1:10 PM on April 21, 2017 [24 favorites]
Thank you for posting this, and thank you to everyone who has commented. I appreciate hearing so many different sides of the adoption experience.
My husband and I briefly considered adoption when we were experiencing fertility issues, especially as I also had a family member who was a director of an adoption agency. I could never quite wrap my head around it though, as it just never felt right deep down. I started trying to be a parent at an older age though, so maybe what I was experiencing was a knowledge of privilege, without really understanding what I was feeling or having the language to describe it. Deep down, I felt like I would always want that child to return to their birth mother, even as I knew I would fall in love with the child. Or maybe because I would fall in love with the child, out of love I would want that birth parent experience for them.
The comment above about it being harder to get younger people to understand what the birth mothers are experiencing (and the trauma that the baby will experience, I now know as a birth mother myself)... I wonder if that's because as young people we are bombarded with messages that make adoption sound so easy "just give the baby up" like you're dropping clothes off at goodwill. Before pregnancy no one ever really explains to you the physical imperative that hormones wreck on your body to possess and protect this little being. You just don't understand it until you experience it. And it seems in our society it's not impressed upon young men either, with so many messages in pop culture that boil down to "hit it and quit it".
I'll be thinking of this topic for a while.
posted by vignettist at 1:23 PM on April 21, 2017 [5 favorites]
My husband and I briefly considered adoption when we were experiencing fertility issues, especially as I also had a family member who was a director of an adoption agency. I could never quite wrap my head around it though, as it just never felt right deep down. I started trying to be a parent at an older age though, so maybe what I was experiencing was a knowledge of privilege, without really understanding what I was feeling or having the language to describe it. Deep down, I felt like I would always want that child to return to their birth mother, even as I knew I would fall in love with the child. Or maybe because I would fall in love with the child, out of love I would want that birth parent experience for them.
The comment above about it being harder to get younger people to understand what the birth mothers are experiencing (and the trauma that the baby will experience, I now know as a birth mother myself)... I wonder if that's because as young people we are bombarded with messages that make adoption sound so easy "just give the baby up" like you're dropping clothes off at goodwill. Before pregnancy no one ever really explains to you the physical imperative that hormones wreck on your body to possess and protect this little being. You just don't understand it until you experience it. And it seems in our society it's not impressed upon young men either, with so many messages in pop culture that boil down to "hit it and quit it".
I'll be thinking of this topic for a while.
posted by vignettist at 1:23 PM on April 21, 2017 [5 favorites]
The article refers to first mothers as often the preferred term instead of “birth mothers” but I don't see anyone here using that terminology. Maybe they mean it's a neologism.
posted by aniola at 1:30 PM on April 21, 2017
posted by aniola at 1:30 PM on April 21, 2017
Along the lines of what you are saying, emjaybee and vignettist:
As someone who has had fertility problems and has no living children, I have thought long and hard about what I would be willing to do to become a parent. I sometimes find myself engaged in discussions with people who think choosing IVF over adoption is unethical and selfish. However, I have long been uneasy with the ethics of adoption and although I won't pretend there's nothing fraught about IVF, I definitely wouldn't say it's MORE problematic, ethically, than adoption.
posted by hurdy gurdy girl at 1:31 PM on April 21, 2017 [8 favorites]
As someone who has had fertility problems and has no living children, I have thought long and hard about what I would be willing to do to become a parent. I sometimes find myself engaged in discussions with people who think choosing IVF over adoption is unethical and selfish. However, I have long been uneasy with the ethics of adoption and although I won't pretend there's nothing fraught about IVF, I definitely wouldn't say it's MORE problematic, ethically, than adoption.
posted by hurdy gurdy girl at 1:31 PM on April 21, 2017 [8 favorites]
I still struggle with how to think of this when on the other side, are people I know who have dealt with infertility
As someone in the Unable Able to Give Birth Who Wants To crowd, this article ads another disturbing layer of privilege and cluelessness to the suggestion that one "can always adopt*", when trying to seek support over childlessness-related related grief.
I'm not saying that no one should adopt, but some people make it sound like you can just go off to the baby store--a totally fucked up attitude to take--, adopt a child like a pet, and it's all just hunky-dory for everyone involved, without much consideration for the consequences for child long-term or the family of origin of that child.
* A classic piece of I'm-giving-advice-so-I-feel-better-about-the-discomfort-of-my-powerlessness-in-the-face-of-your-sadness "advice". Please don't be the person who says this phrase to a woman, cis- or trans-, or other person who wants to give birth and is grieving about reproductive issues.
posted by Excommunicated Cardinal at 1:40 PM on April 21, 2017 [22 favorites]
As someone in the Unable Able to Give Birth Who Wants To crowd, this article ads another disturbing layer of privilege and cluelessness to the suggestion that one "can always adopt*", when trying to seek support over childlessness-related related grief.
I'm not saying that no one should adopt, but some people make it sound like you can just go off to the baby store--a totally fucked up attitude to take--, adopt a child like a pet, and it's all just hunky-dory for everyone involved, without much consideration for the consequences for child long-term or the family of origin of that child.
* A classic piece of I'm-giving-advice-so-I-feel-better-about-the-discomfort-of-my-powerlessness-in-the-face-of-your-sadness "advice". Please don't be the person who says this phrase to a woman, cis- or trans-, or other person who wants to give birth and is grieving about reproductive issues.
posted by Excommunicated Cardinal at 1:40 PM on April 21, 2017 [22 favorites]
I am so heartened by the many thoughtful comments here. Reiterating that I am not against adoption and in fact have it in my own extended family, minority siblings, older and from foster care. There really are some children who need homes and permanency, and the pain of infertility is something I do have sympathy for. Nothing is all black and white, and neither surrendering mothers nor adoptive parents deserve to be demonized. But the money-making adoption industry that exploits both sides is another story. International adoption is fraught with corruption, and the white newborn infant market in the US, with such scarce product now, is mostly about selling to the highest bidder.
Aniola, yes, "first mother" is a neologism, an insider word, but most people do still use "birthmother" as the most easily understood term. Personally I do not care what term is used; I am still a mother who gave up her child by any name. There is no term that mitigates the grief.
mwhybark, I share your skepticism about Verrier's theory of a universal primal wound at birth for all adopted people, but there are indeed special circumstances and issues that many adopted people share. My son swears he has no primal wound and I believe him, but he did have difficulties growing up in the family that got him, and it took him many years to share the whole story with me.
posted by mermayd at 1:46 PM on April 21, 2017 [4 favorites]
Aniola, yes, "first mother" is a neologism, an insider word, but most people do still use "birthmother" as the most easily understood term. Personally I do not care what term is used; I am still a mother who gave up her child by any name. There is no term that mitigates the grief.
mwhybark, I share your skepticism about Verrier's theory of a universal primal wound at birth for all adopted people, but there are indeed special circumstances and issues that many adopted people share. My son swears he has no primal wound and I believe him, but he did have difficulties growing up in the family that got him, and it took him many years to share the whole story with me.
posted by mermayd at 1:46 PM on April 21, 2017 [4 favorites]
As a woman who has struggled with infertility, there are so many people telling you that adoption is the more ethical choice if you really want to parent a child because 'there are so many unwanted children out there who would love a good home.' Many people seem to think that doing assisted reproduction is selfish and that you're only doing it to make a mini-mi.
Some of those people use 'good home' in the sense that they know that my husband and I would love a child. But some of them are also referring, more or less explicitly, to the fact that we are white, heterosexual, married, (relatively) well off - all of which come with societal privileges that they assume would make any child 'grateful' to be adopted by us. As if they would make us objectively better parents.
The white savior ideas, made personal, ignore all of the tremendous complications of adoption, and assumes that the child is a totally blank slate, without their own personal history or attributes. International adoption adds a whole other layer of complexity, since in many cases where is little transparency about a child's background. It's uncomfortable enough for me to know that I don't want to play that role.
It also gives me tremendous respect for the families who have managed to navigate adoptions sensitively. It's hard, and I know that it does result in happy families. But many people just don't seem to give it enough serious thought.
And I appreciate all of the thoughtful responses in this thread - it's given me even more to think about.
posted by oryelle at 1:47 PM on April 21, 2017 [16 favorites]
Some of those people use 'good home' in the sense that they know that my husband and I would love a child. But some of them are also referring, more or less explicitly, to the fact that we are white, heterosexual, married, (relatively) well off - all of which come with societal privileges that they assume would make any child 'grateful' to be adopted by us. As if they would make us objectively better parents.
The white savior ideas, made personal, ignore all of the tremendous complications of adoption, and assumes that the child is a totally blank slate, without their own personal history or attributes. International adoption adds a whole other layer of complexity, since in many cases where is little transparency about a child's background. It's uncomfortable enough for me to know that I don't want to play that role.
It also gives me tremendous respect for the families who have managed to navigate adoptions sensitively. It's hard, and I know that it does result in happy families. But many people just don't seem to give it enough serious thought.
And I appreciate all of the thoughtful responses in this thread - it's given me even more to think about.
posted by oryelle at 1:47 PM on April 21, 2017 [16 favorites]
I wish it were possible to write about these issues without (inevitably) framing this as a situation where "mainstream feminism" is out of touch. I've read dozens of articles from 'mainstream' feminist sites about the problems surrounding adoption, even as I've seen the same sites support adoption rights for gay people -- the one doesn't displace the other.
posted by steady-state strawberry at 1:48 PM on April 21, 2017 [6 favorites]
posted by steady-state strawberry at 1:48 PM on April 21, 2017 [6 favorites]
The thing is, being literate (articles) about the issue already implies a degree of remove from 'mainstream feminist'. The mainstream does not read.
As a gay person I've literally been verbally advised--unsolicited--that I "could" adopt. And since it really was a white woman in a position of power saying those words at me, at that time and in that context, it resonates with what the article is articulating. It's not the subset of feminist literature; as the article gives examples of, it's people's attitudes and the industry and market and how all that amounts to anti-feminism even if the words and efforts are well-intentioned.
posted by polymodus at 2:09 PM on April 21, 2017 [1 favorite]
As a gay person I've literally been verbally advised--unsolicited--that I "could" adopt. And since it really was a white woman in a position of power saying those words at me, at that time and in that context, it resonates with what the article is articulating. It's not the subset of feminist literature; as the article gives examples of, it's people's attitudes and the industry and market and how all that amounts to anti-feminism even if the words and efforts are well-intentioned.
posted by polymodus at 2:09 PM on April 21, 2017 [1 favorite]
re birthmother-slash-whatever terminology:
A usage which adoptees do seem to agree on is that the terminology "real parent / real mom / real dad / real family" is hated. It perceived as socially weighted to privilege the relinquishing mother and family and therefore it intrinsically devalues our actual, real, experiences of familial socialization.
adoptees use a number of different terms. bio-parent was the term I used growing up. First mother, although journalistically accurate, does not feel correct for me personally. One of the issues in developing and using the terminology is perceived traditions of precedence.
There's no evidence of a contemporary consensus that I can see. in my FB groups currently the disambiguating terms that seem to be in highest currency use a chatspeak-style initial abbreviation prepended to the relative term, thus: aparent, afather, amom, bfam, afam, bsis, bsib, nmom. In theory I suppose acousin or bcousin might be usable but I don't recall seeing it.
The first-as-opposed-to-birth choice is reasoned such that it decenters reproduction as the mother-in-question's primary social appellation. some adoptees reject it as it is also seen as misrepresenting the social experience of being mothered. the counter to that is that one's birth mother of course did engage in the social act of mothering during the period of time one was in gestation.
posted by mwhybark at 2:47 PM on April 21, 2017 [2 favorites]
A usage which adoptees do seem to agree on is that the terminology "real parent / real mom / real dad / real family" is hated. It perceived as socially weighted to privilege the relinquishing mother and family and therefore it intrinsically devalues our actual, real, experiences of familial socialization.
adoptees use a number of different terms. bio-parent was the term I used growing up. First mother, although journalistically accurate, does not feel correct for me personally. One of the issues in developing and using the terminology is perceived traditions of precedence.
There's no evidence of a contemporary consensus that I can see. in my FB groups currently the disambiguating terms that seem to be in highest currency use a chatspeak-style initial abbreviation prepended to the relative term, thus: aparent, afather, amom, bfam, afam, bsis, bsib, nmom. In theory I suppose acousin or bcousin might be usable but I don't recall seeing it.
The first-as-opposed-to-birth choice is reasoned such that it decenters reproduction as the mother-in-question's primary social appellation. some adoptees reject it as it is also seen as misrepresenting the social experience of being mothered. the counter to that is that one's birth mother of course did engage in the social act of mothering during the period of time one was in gestation.
posted by mwhybark at 2:47 PM on April 21, 2017 [2 favorites]
Finally, with regard to reproduction and parenting, for me personally, I am disinterested in either, and I understand this to be reflective of my identity as an adoptee. In my group, about a third of us don't have kids. Another third of us have large numbers of kids. The rest have one or two. I suppose this represents a bell curve.
posted by mwhybark at 2:54 PM on April 21, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by mwhybark at 2:54 PM on April 21, 2017 [1 favorite]
When I adopted 18 years ago, I was well aware of the inequalities and injustices that poor or minority women face and how in a more just society they could have gotten real help and kept their child. I don't think you had to be a feminist to know that.
But, the child I adopted was already 6 years old, in foster care and was never going to be returned to his first mother. What was the ethical thing to do? I took him in and made sure he grew up understanding the pressures and injustices his first mother faced. And that I continue to work so that families don't have to be broken apart.
Thank you for posting this article.
posted by SyraCarol at 3:49 PM on April 21, 2017 [19 favorites]
But, the child I adopted was already 6 years old, in foster care and was never going to be returned to his first mother. What was the ethical thing to do? I took him in and made sure he grew up understanding the pressures and injustices his first mother faced. And that I continue to work so that families don't have to be broken apart.
Thank you for posting this article.
posted by SyraCarol at 3:49 PM on April 21, 2017 [19 favorites]
It is for the reasons described in the article, that well-off white women, including many feminist leaders, are those who benefit from adoption, and from their classist position feel that they are raising our poor little bastards to a higher standard of living and consciousness by adopting.
I'm old enough to be counted as a Second Wave feminist. There's a parallel that I think could be used to help yank Second Wave feminists closer to understanding this. In the late 80s there were quite a few divorce cases [source: Mothers and Custody by Chesler], where the judge granted custody to the father, using the argument that he has a bigger salary and he's already remarried so that other woman can be substituted for you and your child will be better off. As a female parent, itt's hard for me to think about that without feeling a visceral "fuck, no". It's not exactly a chance to walk in the shoes of a first mother, but it creates a scenario in which to imagine being told your child would be better off with moneyed, married parents. Ick.
posted by puddledork at 8:03 AM on April 22, 2017 [2 favorites]
I'm old enough to be counted as a Second Wave feminist. There's a parallel that I think could be used to help yank Second Wave feminists closer to understanding this. In the late 80s there were quite a few divorce cases [source: Mothers and Custody by Chesler], where the judge granted custody to the father, using the argument that he has a bigger salary and he's already remarried so that other woman can be substituted for you and your child will be better off. As a female parent, itt's hard for me to think about that without feeling a visceral "fuck, no". It's not exactly a chance to walk in the shoes of a first mother, but it creates a scenario in which to imagine being told your child would be better off with moneyed, married parents. Ick.
posted by puddledork at 8:03 AM on April 22, 2017 [2 favorites]
It may be that adoption should be strictly a function of government, possibly via non-profits that meet high standards and thus earn tax-exempt status or grant funding. Taking away the profit motive would be a win-win: it would remove the reason that some women are pressured by profiteering agencies, while making adoption easier to accomplish, since not all good parent candidates are super rich. Any gap in demand left by the non-profits should be filled by expanding social services, and the foster care system.
Despite the fact that this model would surely increase the number of children adopted rather than aborted, the political right would probably find it hard to send more money towards the poor.
It will be hard to remove the social and family based pressure on women who are in certain cultural settings and certain homes. That includes both pressuring to give up children for adoption and pressuring to abort, for sex selection, saving face, and economic reasons. I would like to see the political left push for more financial and moral support for young mothers, as well as trying to make future life for female babies just as viable as for males. Oh, wait, that's what the left is all about already.
posted by TreeRooster at 11:55 AM on April 22, 2017 [3 favorites]
Despite the fact that this model would surely increase the number of children adopted rather than aborted, the political right would probably find it hard to send more money towards the poor.
It will be hard to remove the social and family based pressure on women who are in certain cultural settings and certain homes. That includes both pressuring to give up children for adoption and pressuring to abort, for sex selection, saving face, and economic reasons. I would like to see the political left push for more financial and moral support for young mothers, as well as trying to make future life for female babies just as viable as for males. Oh, wait, that's what the left is all about already.
posted by TreeRooster at 11:55 AM on April 22, 2017 [3 favorites]
I recently read a few articles by Nefertiti Austin after hearing her interviewed on the podcast One Bad Monther. Austin is a black woman who adopted a black boy then later adopted his younger half sister. Part of what she writes about is being invisible as a Black adoptive parent. They articles are somewhat orthagonal to the FPP article and definitely worth reading.
Nefertiti Austin on Adoption’s #PARENTINGSOWHITE Problem
I Asked My Son if He Missed His Birth Mom: NEFERTITI AUSTIN on Why Adoptive Parents Shouldn’t Be Afraid of Hard Questions
posted by insectosaurus at 6:36 PM on April 22, 2017 [2 favorites]
Nefertiti Austin on Adoption’s #PARENTINGSOWHITE Problem
I Asked My Son if He Missed His Birth Mom: NEFERTITI AUSTIN on Why Adoptive Parents Shouldn’t Be Afraid of Hard Questions
posted by insectosaurus at 6:36 PM on April 22, 2017 [2 favorites]
« Older Aux Armes, Citoyens (part deux) | Investigative theatre with black gay and bi, HIV+... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by zenwerewolf at 9:15 AM on April 21, 2017 [4 favorites]