I am a first time adoptive mom. We have an open adoption and good relations with the birthparents. This website has changed my thinking about the open adoption in that it has made me more interested in pursuing the relationship with the birthparents instead of just enduring it. I appreciate the experience shared here and am glad to have found this blog. I have more questions about understanding adoption in general I was hoping others could help me. I’ve always been of the mindset that the child should be placed in whatever is the best situation and whoever has the best skill to be a loving parent.
Some on this blog seem to convey that the best thing for the child is to stay with the firstmom unless she relinquishes. I don’t understand this thinking. What if the firstmom is a single parent on drugs living off the government? How can you compare that life to a stable married couple who can provide anything the child needs and love him or her like their own? In my situation, the firstparents were children themselves. They didn’t have jobs; they still lived with their parents who were unwilling to take care of a grandchild as well as their own children. My son’s birthmom DID want to keep him. She knew she couldn’t give him what she wanted him to have….a chance at a good life and opportunities and experiences she never had. Her decision had nothing to do with herself and everything to do with her son. If she would’ve chosen to keep him, it seems some on this website, would say…”Well good for her! That baby is in the best place…with his mother.” I couldn’t disagree more.
No related posts.
I’m so glad that you’ve found this site helpful in your own adoption experiences!! Now on to your question/commentary.
I sure don’t speak for everyone here and I think you’ll find diverse opinions on this site but I’ll go ahead and answer this for myself.
First of all, I think it’s a fallacy to start with the worst case scenario (mother on drugs who can’t support herself or her baby) when we talk about domestic infant adoption policy. Certainly there are situations where adoption might be a best case scenario for a child who is in danger (and there are adoptive parents on this site who are parenting children who came from those situations) but this doesn’t reflect most domestic infant adoptions. So I just wanted to be clear on that.
Secondly I can’t judge other people’s adoptions. Only the people who are living them can judge and even then we all have very different points of views. How I feel about my daughter’s adoption likely isn’t the same as how my daughter’s first family (parents, grandparents, etc.) feel about it and likely isn’t the same as how my daughter will grow to feel about it. So I can’t say whether or not your son’s first mom made the right decision for herself or for her baby but that’s ok because it’s not my job to do that. My job as a member of this community is to support you and your family as you live the adoption your living and to support the idea of openness.
Finally when we start saying things like “child should be placed in whatever is the best situation and whoever has the best skill to be a loving parent” it worries me because who can really say what the best situation is?
When I had my (biological) son, we were living in a one bedroom apartment and relying on public transportation. I quit my job soon after and we struggled financially. But does that mean my son should have been placed with a couple who had more means and capabilities? Someone with more parenting experience or access to better support? Of course not.
I mean, it just seems like a slippery slope. If we’re just talking on paper, there’s always someone who’d likely be a better parenting prospect. (Again, we’re not talking about a child who is in danger — we’re talking about someone who is considering his/her parenting options.)
I have known women who get their lives together when they get pregnant or when the baby actually arrives. I used to work at a women’s shelter and I know that you can’t always known what kind of parent someone will be just by looking at their circumstances. I’ve also know (in twelve years of parenting) that some really good on paper parents are pretty lousy to their kids. We just can’t always know.
And so it goes back to my thinking that the only people who can really have an opinion on any individual adoption are the people who are living it and even then we need to appreciate that there will be as many points of view as there are people involved.
I would have supported your son’s first mom had she decided to parent but I support her in this choice as well and I support you as you work to be the best mom you can be in loving care of the son you share.
Thanks for sharing. I agree that the case I stated is not always the norm. I agree that parents who look great on paper can be lousy in practice. But I look at my son’s birthparents and I think…if they would’ve kept him he’d probably turn out like them. Is that too much to assume? So here’s what I’m envisioning…he grows up and experiments with some drugs and maybe works at a gas station, rents on the shady side of town and has relationships with girls, but no committment. Why would he be any different than what he’s known? I know there are people who overcome their circumstances, but what are the odds? Most of them don’t. So, generally speaking, I come to the conclusion that most likely, his life is drastically changed now that we are his parents. He will learn to save money, to work hard, to educate himself, to committ to relationships, to work through problems, to make good long term decisions. Therefore….which scenario is the best for him?
I guess what I’m wondering is….what is wrong with this line of thinking?
Dawn, your response was so beautiful and well put. I applaud your gracious and wise words – indeed, who can judge where it is best for a child, except those who are in the center of that world themselves. And, the key is this: to offer and obtain support once the decision has been made – - that is so vital.
And to the honest and open adoptive mom who has expressed her heart and opinions, I applaud your vulnerability… and your search for wisdom and input.
I speak from many angles and life experiences. I am an adoptive mom (#1 closed adoption of a 3 day-old baby girl 20+ years ago with a teen-aged birthmom, and #2 a 7-year-old son from Brazil 9 years ago) and I am a bio-mom x2 (after not technically expected to conceive); I am also the grandmother of an unanticipated, but treasured grandson (the son of my oldest adopted daughter) who now lives with us (both daughter and grandson). I certainly hope I haven’t confused you, but I wanted you to see the various sides I view adoption and teen pregnancy.
Let me say that I anticipated a lot of things as mother 20 years ago – things like building a healthy and thriving family – things like passing along a legacy of integrity, success and love. I believe we have succeeded, but this has come with many painful turns in the journey, and it has come with sacrifice beyond what we anticipated, and it has come in the form of life as we never expected.
The most difficult reality we faced (and I don’t believe this is necessarily the norm) was the reality that our oldest daughter became a rebel unlike anyone I had known in my personal experience (especially nothing we had “sown”). The truth of her pain didn’t sink in right away, but as I searched for answers, I slowly began to see that her difficulties were rooted very deeply in the abandonment she experienced at birth. Obviously it wasn’t something she realized in her own thought process – - it was an unexpressed, undetected anguish she didn’t even realize existed…. but for some reason, it came out in very ugly and damaging forms.
Our story is probably not unique, nor is it the “norm”… it is just our story. The truth I hope to show is that there are no rules to parenting and no “sure things”. Growing up with great parents, unfortunately, doesn’t always mean great kids… whether conceived or adopted. Parenting is somewhat of a risk, but one worth taking in absolutely every way… whether conceived or adopted. Parenting success cannot be measured by the amount of rebellion we endure or the amount of smooth-sailing we enjoy… it is about love… and that’s it… unconditional, beautiful and sometimes difficult love.
My (adopted) daughter unexpectedly became pregnant at 19 and gave birth to a beautiful boy without the support or involvement of the bio-dad. We agreed to support and assist her as much as we could. She looked at her son when she brought him home from the hospital and with a heart of great understanding, she gazed at him and tearfully wondered how her birth-mother had the strength to relinquish her to adoption… she was truly stumped.
What was best for her 20+ years ago? To adopt her as her mother heart-wrenchingly chose to relinquish her. What was best for my grandson 13 months ago? To cherish, love and support him and his mommy as they learned to be a great son and mom (which they are). The transformation has been more than remarkable and it is a joy to have both her and him living under our roof.
Basically, the moral of my story (which is far from over) is that love and grace are truly life-changing commodities… and I plan on learning and living in both for the rest of my life! In them, there is true joy.
respectfully,
joanne
Dawn, your post hit on just about everything I would want to say! Especially the slippery slope argument, but I’ll get to that in a minute…
As a first Mom, I figured I would chime in regarding the examples being given and maybe flip things around a little bit…..when my daughter was born I lived with my parents and was bartending. However, I had a college degree (okay, two college degrees) but didn’t have the support of my daughter’s birthfather and wasn’t ready to parent. BUT, I would have been an awesome parent to my daughter. Could I have afforded to send her to a big time expensive college? I don’t know. Could I have given her a new car on her 16th birthday? Who knows? Are there people out there that could probably GUARANTEE these things? Absolutely.
And here’s where it gets a little tricky – and I think it helps see things from a different perspective. I don’t know what the original poster can promise their children – BUT I can promise there’s SOMEONE looking to adopt that can promise more – say….Madonna. Does that mean Madonna is MORE deserving than the OP?
No! Of course not. It’s easily understood in the context of adoptive parents but we’re reluctant to see it in the context of first parents. There’s almost ALWAYS a “better” option out there. That’s why “better” is such a dangerous conversation to have.
However, when a woman even considers placing a child for adoption, it seems she opens herself up to a world of judgment regarding what would be “better” for her child. Then, if she chooses to parent, she has to face that…….
I’m afraid I’ve gone a little off topic, but the definition of “better” is just so subjective and I think it does a great disservice to ALL sides of the adoption triad.
Thanksgivingmom I think you hit it on the head; “better” is too subjective to be useful, especially in the long term. People lose jobs, people become disabled, people divorce. On the flip side people improve their circumstances, get promotions, change their lifestyles for the better, and recover from substance abuse. Being an adoptive parent is no shield against the vagaries of life. Being a first parent doesn’t mean one will always be in the exact circumstances they were at the time of relinquishment. There are no guarantees that either is always or will always be “better” comparatively.
Basically it’s not possible to say natural parents are always better or that adoptive parents are always better or that whatever the situation is at X point in time is the way it will always be.
Like others have said I think for me it comes down to defining what “best” really means.
I’m an adoptive mom and while we were waiting I kept looking at other parent profiles – couples who lived in the suburbs in mcmansions, wife didn’t work, wife loved to bake, wife loved to make scrapbooks, husband had a generic office job, etc. Our profile was SO different – we both work, live in a TINY house in an urban area, our neighborhood is “transitional” (meaning it used to be the bad part of town, but now all of the artists live there), non-traditional nursery decorations, etc. On paper those other couples win the “best” contest every time.
Also, I think the mother-child relationship is pretty sacred and should be kept intact where possible. I dread the day when my son finally gets it and realizes that his own mother up and left him at the hospital. Even though he’s in a pretty good situation with two parents that adore him, college education paid for, etc. that realization is still going to sting. His life with us is different than it would have otherwise been, but I don’t think by definition that necessarily makes it better.
To all who commented, I truly appreciate your wisdom. I’m beginning to understand what you mean by the slippery slope. I really needed to think this through. It is much appreciated.
There is one more thing I still am having trouble with. One poster above said,
“who can judge where it is best for a child, except those who are in the center of that world themselves”
I don’t like this line of thinking because it insinuates no one can make a fair judgement call except for the firstparents (who are in that world), who frequently are least qualified to make a good judgement based on age, circumstance and emotion.
I choose to work in a very low income area and I see what is called “poverty mentality” all the time. It is very short term thinking many times based on emotion, not the plain facts. A woman who’s daughter was pregnant at 18 was ecstatic that she was going to be a grandma. There was no thought given to the fact that the girl and her boyfriend were abusive to eachother, involved in drugs or had no plans to get decent jobs. The baby was born and now the police are frequently called to the home and the boyfriend has gone to jail for drugs. She was “IN” the situation and all she could think of is what would make her happy….to have a grandchild. I’ve seen this quite a few times. I think many times those in the situation are the worst to make the decision. They can’t see out of their own selfish desires. Some may say…well, the baby will still be loved by his mother and that’s what is important. Say if you were that baby…you were the one who had to grow up in an environment w/ no dad and mom strung out on drugs…what would you want for yourself?
I am not trying to stir anyone up here and I apologize if anything I’ve said comes off as judgemental or harsh. I am really trying to understand. Thanks for your comments.
Are you conflating child welfare with infant adoption? They seem to be two separate areas. Do those who have that “poverty mentality” you mentioned even consider relinquishing for adoption? If their kids are in a bad situation, are they placed in foster care? Are you talking foster adoptions?
Seems to me that “making an adoption plan” is part of the middle and upper class cultures where the comparison of “better” is much, much more difficult.
Here in my portion of the rural South, the culture is one where people keep and raise their babies, really regardless of their circumstances. We do not have a high domestic infant adoption rate, even though we have amongst the highest teen pregnancy and single mother statistics, highest rates of illiteracy, and lowest abortion stats. People simply don’t voluntarily relinquish here as often as they do elsewhere.
So you think that adoption should be forced? I do not disagree that being adopted is probably preferable to being raised around drugs and crime.
What I fail to see the exact point you are trying to make, due to the fact that most domestic infant adoptions statistically do not involve that.
Adoption from foster care does frequently involve kids from dangerous situations, however, and I don’t think anyone here has stated that adoption is NOT preferable when there is danger inherent with the first parents.
I’m going to be blatantly honest here. My son’s birthmom is a loving, caring person. She also makes incredibly poor choices, just as her mother did before her. She’s parenting two children, one who is now high special needs, possibly because of the situation that S put him in. One of her children is a girl. I see that girl, and I just hope that S isn’t a grandmother before age 30, just as S’s mother was.
I don’t know that we can say “most” domestic infant adoptions don’t involve some sort of danger to a child. I don’t think we can generalize at all. Dawn and I sort of had this conversation before. Her DD’s birthmom is in a very different situation than my son’s birthmom. Dawn once wrote that she thought her DD’s birthmom would have made a good mom. I can’t say the same for S.
This is about more than money, obviously. For me, it’s mostly about experience. Does the average 15 year old have the resources to parent a child? What about a woman who continually finds herself in abusive relationships, even if the children aren’t being abused? A 20-something woman who basically gives her child to her parents so she can go out to party all night? (And when they say no, she takes the baby with her to the parties.) I submit that a child would be “better” off in other situations. None of these situations involve foster care or CPS, necessarily. They’re just examples of real-life moms who might not have the skills to parent, but who aren’t badly off enough to warrant state intervention.
Then, there are the moms like thanksgivingmom, Dawn’s DD’s birthmom, and Jenna. They’re awesome people who might and do make great moms. “Meeting” them shifted my perception of birth mothers, because the only actual birth mother I knew was my son’s.
I’m annoyed – to say the least – with the mentality that a child is always better off with his first/birth/bio parents. I cannot abide those who are anti-adoption. I want to throttle people who believe that all adopted children will always be hurt, regardless of their circumstances. You can’t make generalizations like that.
I think I’m beginning to understand what you are saying. The situation you are describing is obviously not ideal for a child and children need more than love alone in order to thrive. However, just because your parents can’t afford to send you to college doesn’t make them unworthy of raising you. It seems so often we equate material wealth with healthy upbringing and condemn parents because they may have limited means. Strung out on drugs and unable to provide stability is a different story.
Your first description was “experimenting” with drugs, working at a gas station, renting in a bad part of town – that alone doesn’t seem to be the product of un-fit parenting and, in my opinion, doesn’t make you a completely undesirable member of society.
Personally, I think the women who are considering open adoption are a self-selecting bunch. I could be wrong. My son’s mom is a college student who lives at home in the suburbs – had my son stayed with her he would have been totally ok and she would have taken good care of him.
“I don’t like this line of thinking because it insinuates no one can make a fair judgement call except for the firstparents (who are in that world), who frequently are least qualified to make a good judgement based on age, circumstance and emotion.”
I think that this is a pretty unfair blanket statement to make. I was twenty four years old when I chose to place my daughter for adoption. I had two college degrees. I was raised in a great family, with whom I lived in a nice neighborhood. I believe, personally, that I was certainly qualified to make that decision. Not only was I qualified, but I think I was the ONLY person qualified to make that decision for me. In my opinion, the decision to place a child NEEDS to be made by the child’s parents. Not by the doctors that presume the young Mom can’t be a GREAT Mom. Not by the agency that will make money off of the placement. Not by the counselors hired by the agency. Not by folks that would like to adopt the child.
Was I emotional? You bet, but when we’re dealing with children and becoming parents, we’re all pretty emotional – adoptive parents included. If we include adoptive parents as being “in that world” along side firstparents, I think their emotions would CERTAINLY cloud judgement as to what’s “best” as well. They desire nothing more than to be parents! So they’ll be more likely to see their situation as “better” than what the expectant parents can provide. (Not ALL adoptive parents of course, but I do believe that some have their judgement clouded as well).
Now, if a child is in DANGER – then it’s an issue for DCFS to get involved in, which is a different situation entirely.
The stats aren’t kept formally like some other stats are, but in my reading some have been inferred by various organization. I like the Evan B. Donaldson Institute, their research methods seem solid.
For the record I am an adoptive mom, and very far from anti-adoption. I also hate to generalize, but as there are few stats, we can only go by what evidence there is and various first moms online or met in real life.
I have been researching all of this for years and have spoken with multiple first moms and adoptive parents, and don’t seem to find anything indicating that first moms are MOSTLY drug addicted or criminal, outside of the child welfare system
I also don’t know of anyone here at OAS who believes that first mom is always best even in dangerous or horrible circumstances such as drug addicted or criminals. If you have seen this here, please link to those discussions.
When I had my first child at barely 18, everyone urged me to place for adoption. They said it would have been better for her and better for me. I was supposed to see all of the things I wouldn’t be able to do if I was a mom, all of the things I wouldn’t be able to give my daughter. They made me feel horribly guilty…but I parented my first child.
Can you imagine expecting your first child and having people tell you they’re sorry or offering condolences on the pregnancy instead of congratulations? That child is now 7 and while life has had its bumps, we’re doing okay. Placing for adoption may or may not have been “better” for my daughter. We can’t know how her life would have turned out if I had placed. For that matter, it might have been “better” for me personally to have had an abortion and not carried a full term pregnancy at that point in my life. I’m not saying it would have been better (I can’t imagine my life without her), only that there’s no way to compare possible futures because we just don’t know.
I know one first mom from the baby snatch era who is in reunion. She’s the mom of a friend of mine. Anyway, the son she placed for adoption when she was 16 was sexually abused and in and out of foster homes. Her next child, not even a full year younger is one of my close friends. Sure, that’s an extreme example, but adoptive parents aren’t always perfect any more than any other parent can be expected to be perfect.
In your situation, things might be “better”, I can’t know that or argue it one way or another. But as a general statement, I don’t think you can say that “staying with first mom is best” or “being placed for adoption is best” because you can never know what the other outcome would have been. Maybe the scenario you give would have happened or maybe the mom (not a first mom if she hadn’t chosen to place) would have gone to college on the many scholarships available to single parents and built a good life for herself and her child or maybe she would have chosen parents that weren’t you and the child ends up being abused or maybe she would have parented and abused her child. There’s no way to know.
If the scenario you imagine for your son if he had not been placed helps you, then that’s great. But when I read it, I feel…concerned. Not for your situation necessarily, but in general. Because what if everyone decided that teen moms couldn’t ever be good parents. Would they take our children from us at birth like the baby snatch era even if we would never hurt them and were committed to being good parents? Who would decide what was too young to be a parent? 16, 18, 21, 30? Or would we base it on income level? What would be too poor to parent a child?
If there is risk to the infant/child, foster care will get involved. Then the law decides if the child is “better” with bio-family or with other parents. I’m not anti-adoption…but I think that for adoptive parents (the ones who want a child so much) are not the right people to judge whether someone can or should parent. What looks like a bad situation might not really be as bad as you think or the baby could be the thing that spurs the mom to get out of a dangerous situation or look beyond herself.
The system won’t let me reply directly to you, Anonymous. You said: Well if you advocate for the first parent you obviously think they are worthy of parenting. If you advocate for adoption then you believe they deserve to parent the child.
I encourage you to read The Girls Who Went Away to understand more about how these kinds of prejudices fuel unethical adoptions. I don’t understand why your point of view is so limited that you are forced to create such a dry either/or proposition. I find it offensive.
It seems to be on topic to me. And even if it is off topic to you, it is helpful and useful for others. ie) me.
I’m wondering why it’s helpful to you to continue to advocate that poor people who live in high-crime neighborhoods should not be allowed to keep their children and instead should give their children to rescuing adoptive parents? Because that sounds way off-topic of an open adoption support site.
Ok, my opinion is obvious here so I’m going to step away from the keyboard.
hmmm. So i want to thank all of you for dialoguing w/ each other and myself. Some of my views have changed just over the last few days from reading others input. I guess I was always under the assumption that the environment was highly important in the decision of keeping the child or relinquishing. Now, I’m seeing that the environment is not at such a high priority I originally put it at. I’m also seeing how a firstmother who is disadvantaged may choose to keep her child and that may be the best for the child. Really, I know this sounds elementary, but this is my first time thinking through all of this. I know this conversation has taken some twists and turns, but it has helped me understand my son’s adoption and his first mother on more healthy terms. So thank you.
I did not read all the comments but I want to add my voice to the orginal blog post.
I myself am a responsible woman in her 20′s(soon to be thirty,yikes!) who placed my son for adoption just three years ago. I was and am employed, I lived in a good home(and still live), I had and have a respectful relationship with the first father. Yet I choose to place my son because I couldn’t see past my own insecurities and fears. I go to church and live a life of faith, I always have. My only bad choice was trusting that my sons first father would eventually marry me, I was wrong. Also, placing my son could be a bad choice too. I would just like to say, like you, I think my son adoptive mom just endures ‘open adoption’. I would like it if she could enjoy a close relationship but I am still praying that will happen.
Maybe I am unique in that I am and was and likely always will be a stable, rational, mostly healthy first mom, maybe I am unusual. This site seeks to treat everyone with equal respect for there feelings and seek to support the best way for everyone, first parents, adoptive parents, and adopted people too. You need to honor your child’s first parents because they will always be a part of your child.
i am not only an ap..im an adoptee! my son WAS adopted through dcf, because he was removed from his parents for neglect, drug uses, domestic violence among guns, gangs etc,In the beginning of our journey, i DESPISED his birthmother for what i knew about her. my son had weekly 1hr visits which would make my stomach turn. One time the social worker said,,the mom wants to meet you. I went RELUCTENTLY to that visit with the mind set of hating her for what she was. WELL, i didnt hate her.i LIKED her. she was a young, scared little girl who was a product of her enviorment. I began to mentor her knowing full well that i may have to return this beautiful child bak to her. I was scared but if she had the ability to parent him..who am i to take HER child. Well, after 18 mts she was unable to follow the simple service plan and was put in this position…”go to trial and have the judge drag up all youve done wrong and terminate your rights,,,OR relinquish your rights and hope the preadoptive parents will let you see him.” We talked it through and i sat with her and held her hand as she signed those papers,,tears running down both our faces. It was a Beginning for me, and and end for her,,bitter sweet. my son is now 2 1/2 and we see his birthmother every few months,,not much has changed for her, but her love for him is there, No she could never parent him but she CAN and does love him in her way . now, i just recently met my birthmom, it was a closed adoption, and she would have made a wonderful mom, actually she did, i have a brother, but she was one of the women you described, pregnant, single, no job, no money,no place to live etc, but she loved me, enough to want more than she could give at that time. Would i have turned out ok if she raised me..prob, but life would have been hard and we may have resented each other. Just because my sons birthmother cant parent, she CAN love!
anonymous, you are parenting because she(first mom) wants you to, likely because of the open adoption. You are parenting because now you ARE your sons mom and he needs you.
Don’t think too much about the past, think about the future and how you can teach your son about who he is in every way because he can know his first parents. Even if the reasons that your son was placed with you have changed, the fact that you are the parent has not changed, but the fact that he came from another mom will never change.
I know my son’s first mom could have parented. She knows she could have. Everyone knows she would have been, and will someday be, a fantastic mom. She chose to place him, with us specifically, for reasons other than an inability to be an effective and loving parent.
Her reasons are her own and I prefer not to share them, but they are valid to herself and to me. She is prepared to discuss these reasons with her son when he is old enough to understand.
It might be easier to assimilate or accept or explain if it were all black and white “She can’t parent and I can” or “She is not worthy of being a parent and I am”, but that is not always the case, maybe not even usually the case. It’s absolutely and completely removed from the truth in our specific case.
Life and people are complex and messy and the choices we make are based on numerous factors weighed against each other and reviewed and rethought. If everything were simple it wouldn’t be life.
This was a very interesting conversation to read. While reading I noticed what appear to be inconsistencies in the OP’s posts. The OP said “Some on this blog seem to convey that the best thing for the child is to stay with the firstmom unless she relinquishes.” and “I don’t like this line of thinking because it insinuates no one can make a fair judgement call except for the firstparents (who are in that world), who frequently are least qualified to make a good judgement based on age, circumstance and emotion.” but also said “I am not talking about fostering or DCFS.” So that leaves me to wonder who the OP thinks is best to make a good judgment about what is best for the children? I think if you read The Girls Who Went Away you will find that societal pressure isn’t a good judge, and neither are the agencies that facilitate adoptions. The Indian Adoption Project proved that the government wasn’t a good judge of who was best able to parent. So who is left to be the good judge?
I know you seem to have changed your beliefs about first parents by your last post, OP, but the line of thought you originally conveyed here seems to be a type of….eugenic adoption, for lack of a better term. That is really scary, especially since history has repeatedly proven it to be devastating.
I think I understand where the OP is coming from, and her “journey” through the debate. I think she’s not being careful enough in her wording – a big problem of mine too. I know I’ll write and pick words that make sense to me, and then someone will take them differently than I intended. And I totally see how and why they did that, but it wasn’t what I was thinking at the time.
To quote Gloria Estefan, “the words get in the way”.
To say “frequently” vs. “sometimes” is splitting hairs, I think. It’s “often” vs. “occasionally” according to the Oxford English Dictionary.
The reason I noted that I don’t like people saying that the birth/first mom is always best wasn’t because that was being stated here, but because I felt that the OP was saying that she had encountered that in her life, and I have too.
As an aside, kids can be in dangerous environments and never have CPS near them, though they should. There are borderline situations – like the one my son’s birthmom is in – where it’s hard to tell where or with whom the kids would be better off. I think that type of situation is what the OP was discussing.
I don’t think she was advocating that anyone force adoption, or that all teens should have their babies taken.
A point I tried to make that I think was lost is that there are birth/first moms in all sorts of situations. OP has more experiences with ones who are younger and in poorer situations – not just monetarily, but in terms of support, education, resources, etc. I think that she’s “met” people here who aren’t like that, and that’s changing her point of view.
I don’t think we can say “most” birth moms do anything, really. I’m not a fan of generalizations, though I’m guilty of using them when they suit my purpose. (In fact, that first sentence is a generalization.) I think as we all – OK, I know that as I personally “meet” more people online, and read more, learn more, I find it’s harder to make sweeping statements.
She didn’t say “people in my experience” she said “Some on this blog”
There is a huge difference between occasionally and often, and frequently and sometimes.
By pointing out the confusing use of language and asking for clarifications, I am hoping to understand her true point as intended, and the goal of this discussion. My understanding may be wrong, and I don’t like to misinterpret.
Anonymous – I hope you’re not feeling attacked, as I’m fairly confident that wasn’t anyone’s intention.
Adoption is a touchy subject, and I’ll be the first to admit that I haven’t always had the vocabulary down and I certainly have never considered myself a “pro” – I’m just a first Mom living the life!
I do agree that frequently is pretty clearly different from sometimes – and perhaps NOW after this discussion the OP would like to change her statement to “sometimes”, but I think the distinction can easily be made. To be honest? I’m not sure that “sometimes” is rare enough. I don’t think it gives women enough credit. It worries me to say that women aren’t capable of making their own decisions. Mind you, I’m discussing this in the context of voluntary domestic infant placement without the involvement of CPS or DCFS. I understand that’s a lot of qualifiers, but I think we’ve talked through them and decided that this was the angle from which we were viewing this discussion (but I’m open to correction if I’m mistaken).
Having said that mouthful, decision making is another slippery slope. I couldn’t make a decision about placing/parenting my daughter because I was too emotionally invested? Aren’t ALL pregnant women? And don’t forget our hormones! As many women decide to parent based on emotions that some might not agree with, I believe that many choose to place based on emotions – thinking about all the things they want for their child that they can’t give them (or that they PERCEIVE that they can’t give them). Women that forget that adoption is a permanent solution to a very often temporary problem/situation.
It’s not all that often that I hear of people WISHING someone stepped in to help pregnant women wortk through the emotions that are telling them (possibly not in anyone’s best interest) TO place and convincing them to parent – yet I do hear of people saying that pregnant women need help getting through the emotional connection that’s telling them to parent and pointing out the “logic” of placement. I just can’t understand that……..
(And I’m coming off of a CRAZY busy weekend, so my apologies if the words don’t make sense today!)
Very interesting conversation. However, I must say this: just because one can conceive a child does make them right/best person to raise them.
Let’s be honest, how many time have we read on forms where the child’s birth story is less than idea? How many time have WE ( birth and adoptive ) moms read these stories and thought ” my god, how could she get herself into that situation?” Many of today’s domestic adoptions sound like something from the Jerry Springer show. Birthmom pregnant by another man;birtfather is married or birthmom doesn’t know who the father is. Do you think children should be born into these situations? And if so, will the mother be a good mother due to the dysfunctional situation she and the bfather have created? Let’s face it ,no child is better off in situations lie this or worse.
Atimmons, at the same time, just because someone can ADOPT a child doesn’t make them the right/best person to raise them. Sure, I know lots of stories about people who conceive children when they are not ready/able to raise them but what’s really disturbing (given homestudies and the like), I also know way too many stories about people who adopt children when they are not ready/able to raise them. When it comes right down to it, gross generalizations are just gross.
I’m coming late to this discussion, and haven’t read all of the comments (most of them). Just wanted to add two things: I too have worked a lot with people, especially children, living in poverty, and I am haunted by the fact that my son might have been one of them had his first family not placed him with us. i have a fairly good idea what that would have meant for him, especially a kid with his particular temperament and sensibility — it might have been a very damaging and dangerous life. That doesn’t change the fact that I am also haunted by how hard it must have been for his first family to place him for adoption, and how hard it will be for him (already is) to process and grieve that loss. It’s a quandry. But my second point is this: even if it is CLEAR he is better off with us, wholesale *forced adoption* is NOT the solution. Egads! How ’bout we just end poverty? Seems like that’s a better place to throw our energy anyway.
I don’t think there’s anything particularly wrong with that line of thinking unless someone were to take it and extrapolate it to adoption policy. Within the context of your experience with your son and his first family, you feel good about the adoption — there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that. To assume that every woman in the same circumstances ought to place her child for adoption, too (not that you’re saying that AT ALL — I’m just trying to explain what I mean), that would be taking things too far. Does that make sense?
Yes, I am conflating infant adoption and child welfare. By child welfare, I am talking the well-being of the child. I am not talking about fostering or DCFS. I am talking about situations I see all the time where a teenage girl gets pregnant and decides to keep her baby in a terrible living situation. In my experience/area of the world, this isn’t as rare as some are making it out to be on this blog. Honestly, most of adoptive parents I know have the same experience I’ve had. They think of their adoption as a rescue from what could have been. Saved from what? Poverty, gangs, crime, drugs. What I am saying is…when I see these girls keeping their kids, I think it’s plain to see these babies are NOT in a healthy environment. My judgement call therefore, is that they should’ve been placed with an adoptive family who could provide that healthy environment.
Statiscally? Are there statistics kept on private domestic adoption? My understanding was that there aren’t. If you know of a place to find said statistics, I’d really like to see them. I’m always looking for numbers. Thanks!
Ok, here is the slippery slope exactly.
“They think of their adoption as a rescue from what could have been. Saved from what? Poverty, gangs, crime, drugs. What I am saying is…when I see these girls keeping their kids, I think it’s plain to see these babies are NOT in a healthy environment. My judgement call therefore, is that they should’ve been placed with an adoptive family who could provide that healthy environment.”
This is advocating wholesale removal of kids from one segment of society to another segment and nope, I can’t get behind that. I don’t think the well being of children would be best served from forced adoption.
But Robyn, no one has said that a child is always better off with a first/birth/bio parent here. I’m saying that generalizing that all children are better off with adoptive parents by virtue of the adoptive parents BEING adoptive parents is a fallacy that hasn’t served anyone well.
I also personally believe that having been “rescued” (not your term, referring to the commenter above) doesn’t guarantee a child won’t be hurt by his or her adoption. Losing your birth family — even for very good reasons — is still a loss and some kids are going to feel that more than others.
(again, this is not directly to Robyn but I hit reply to hers so it might looks this way)
But this whole discussion is kinda beyond the purpose of this site, which is to honor our children’s connections to their adoptive families and to their first families. Also, unless there’s info that says otherwise, I assume parents — first or adoptive — are reasonable people because most people are. So I’m not gonna look at all the families here and say, “Yup, all these kids are better off!” because I don’t know that besides which I don’t want first parents to feel that they have to “prove” themselves as being decent human beings like sometimes happens in online adoption communities.
I don’t deny that there are certainly adoptions where placement is the best case scenario but it’s not my default go-to position. I feel like too many first parents have been harmed in the making of adoption stereotypes.
Hi,
I understand there are those out there not in this circumstance. I did say frequently, not always…and that really is just based on my experience. If you read my submission, I noted where I am from and those I know who have adopted the scenario’s are virtually all identical to my own. Ie) the “rescue” scenario.
I guess my thought is….well, where is the line for your last comment…when the child is in “danger.” What if the parents are on drugs; is that enough danger? Or what if they live in a high crime area; is that dangerous? It seems like a subjective question. I guess in my opinion I see those things as dangerous. I would not want my baby around that. But others on this blog seem to think that’s not such a big deal. It seems to be a difference of opinion.
Thanks for commenting.
Well, I am sorry that you feel this discussion is off target with this blog. It is helping me to form my opinions about adoption and my philosophy of it. I have appreciated everyone’s input.
I obviously do not believe every child is better off with adoptive parents. I also do not believe that every child will be totally fine w/ their adoption. Those are things I never said or meant to convey.
As I said previously, in my experience the birthfamilies resemble the scenario’s I described above. That is what I’m referring to…my experience; I’m not trying to make every firstparent out to be some poverty stricken drug dealer.
I think the debate is off-topic because now we’re talking about who deserves to be a parent and the question was originally why some people seem to advocate for first parents, not who deserves to be a parent.
Well if you advocate for the first parent you obviously think they are worthy of parenting. If you advocate for adoption then you believe they deserve to parent the child. It seems to be on topic to me. And even if it is off topic to you, it is helpful and useful for others. ie) me
)
I think that a child is in “danger” when it’s a situation where CPS or DCFS would traditionally intervene and petition for the removal of a child from a home.
I do not think that a high crime area is sufficient proof that a child should be removed from his/her home. If this were the case, there may very well be entire neighborhoods and even cities that are “unfit” for children – and I would hate to think about what the ramifications of that would be.
I understand that most of the people you know fit your rescue scenario….however I’ve made some AMAZING friends that are first Mom’s and they would break all kinds of stereotypes that most people have.
They’re WONDERFUL women that love their children very much, and would have (and subsequently did!) made EXCELLENT parents! I’m so proud of them and love them all so much, and hope that you get to “know” some more of us that can help you see that there really are a great deal of us that could have provided wonderfully for our children.
Perhaps we couldn’t have given them ALL the material things, but they would have been safe and healthy and so very loved by us.
I will look into your book. I guess my opinion is cut and dry because that’s how I understand it. I learn by debate; I don’t just easily take any old opinion I hear…I like to hear others criticize what I have to say and then I take what I agree with and rebutt with what I don’t agree with.
I said in a post below I do not mean to offend. I apologize if I hurt your feelings by my comments. I am truly trying to understand others viewpoints. I am as baffled at yours as you are at mine.
I never thought every child in a high crime neighborhood should be taken away. I think you may be taking bits and pieces of conversation…if you look at all I’ve said, I sum up a typical bad scenario and wonder…wouldn’t it be best for the child to be placed in a good environment? And what is a good environment? And what is too dangerous?
These questions stimulate my understanding of where to draw the line. This is helpful for me.
I agree with everything you said. This conversation has helped me think things through. Thanks.
I really agree with everything you said. In my own situation, now with this new set of beliefs about birthparents and their ability regardless to the environment they may live in, I guess I am wondering…could my sons bm have parented him and done well? I’m not sure. It kind of scares me to even think of it….because I’m wondering, well if she could have and everyone around her told her she couldn’t because of her environment (and we believed it) then why am I parenting?
Okiemunchkinsmom,
)
I did state that SOMETIMES the birthparent is the worst to make that decision because they are directly emotinally attached and cannot make sound judgement because of their love. (See story above) I also was not talking about DCFS. I wasn’t saying that some outside source should tell people where to place their kids either. I don’t think there is one person every time who you can say….this person can make the best judgement call, obviously not. But my question really wasn’t about who could make that decision; it was more about why birthparents are looked at as the number 1 choice, despite negative choices/environment and also what factors into that thinking…environment, ability to parent etc…
Hope that clears it up.
If no third party is stepping in to tell ANY pregnant woman what to do, or assessing the situation, or enforcing judgments on her fitness or whatever, then who is left to make decisions but the pregnant woman herself?
I am still confused as to your main point.
“I did state that SOMETIMES the birthparent is the worst to make that decision because they are directly emotinally attached and cannot make sound judgement because of their love.”
Noooo…you said “I don’t like this line of thinking because it insinuates no one can make a fair judgement call except for the firstparents (who are in that world), who FREQUENTLY are least qualified to make a good judgement based on AGE, CIRCUMSTANCE and EMOTION.” Caps added for emphasis by me. Surely you understand the difference between “sometimes” and “frequently”?
“I wasn’t saying that some outside source should tell people where to place their kids either.” Ok, so you didn’t SAY those words exactly, but logic says that if you think first parents are “FREQUENTLY LEAST qualified to make a good judgment”, and you aren’t talking about CPS intervention, then you think someone else, who is older, in better circumstances, and has less emotion should make the judgment. I got it the first time, I’m just curious who you think is qualified.
MamaB2C, I think she’s/he’s made her/his point very clear now.
Yeah, that’s what I thought. I’d love to see something broad, and not done on small sample sizes. *sigh*
I thought I understood the point, until the last post where she seemingly removed any judger of best circumstances or whatever from the hypothetical.
Thank you Robyn. I probably was not careful with my words and when trying to figure out what I think my views were/are shifting. I have felt attacked and I came to find support, so I feel a little disappointed. I did find some good views though, so that I am grateful for. I wish some people on this blog who are “pro’s” at this whole thing would have a little more grace for those of us not quite used to blogging about highly emotional topics.
Thanks again for saying what I obviously couldn’t.