© Photographer: Angelamaria | Agency: Dreamstime.com

A young couple moves into a new neighborhood.

The next morning while they are eating breakfast,
the young woman sees her neighbor hanging the wash outside.

"That laundry is not very clean", she said.
"She doesn't know how to wash correctly.
Perhaps she needs better laundry soap."

Her husband looked on, but remained silent.

Every time her neighbor would hang her wash to dry,
The young woman would make the same comments.

About a month later, the woman was surprised to see a
Nice clean wash on the line and said to her husband:

"Look, she has learned how to wash correctly.
I wonder who taught her this."

The husband said, "I got up early this morning and
cleaned our windows."

And so it is with life. What we see when watching others
depends on the purity of the window through which we look.

*Found this in my inbox this morning and it was too good not to share!

The Bride

For years after my reunion, as I found myself on an emotional rollercoaster of tremendous grief, I was reduced to tears every time I allowed myself to truly open up in worship to God. It was during those very times, however, I was experiencing healing.

It is wonderful to get "caught up" in worship and allow His Love & Presence to comfort me. But I always found myself asking the same question. You see, many of my loved ones have already passed on so during worship I think about Heaven a lot. Eternity a lot. Because so many I love are there.

HOW could Heaven be Heaven for an adoptee? How could I look forward to complete peace, love, serenity, joy, and happiness if my entire dismembered "family" and self was there (together) in one place?

It caused tremendous anxiety to think about how I would feel with those who gave me up for adoption standing beside those who adopted me. The ones who held the key to my identity beside those who asked me to live as though blindfolded. I would simply want to run and hide. Not very Heavenly.

Adoption tore me apart. It tore my identity, relationships and emotions between two families, two "selves", two worlds. It asked me to deny one world (which housed who I really was) and blindly accept another without question, without feeling, without truth. There is a scripture in the New Testament that speaks of "trading the truth for a lie." When you think about it, adoption does just that.
"Amended" birth certificates replace truthful ones that are "sealed" away forever.

Kind of like how Pinnochio became a real boy only after he told the truth and someone LOVED him ~ I too couldn't become "real" until I faced my dark reality of grief and somehow crawl through the ambivalance, the anger, the confusion, and the tears ~ right into the LIGHT of God's unconditional Love.

I was recently in church, enjoying God's presence during worship, when it dawned on me. The answer to my question. How could Heaven be Heaven for an adoptee? How could I experience peace and unspeakable happiness ANYWHERE my broken family, life, and identity be required to exist in one place? It just didn't seem possible. UNTIL I brought the question to the only One who knew.

The Bible speaks of Christians being the "The Bride" of Christ. He is not only our loving Father, but also our perfect "Bride Groom". He cares for us more than anyone on earth ever could. So it is impossible to "compare" His love with the imperfect, even disappointing "love" we experience here on earth. He will "never leave us, nor forsake us." Never.

His love, when we allow it, will envelope us so fully, and heal us so completely, that all turmoil will have to flee. The Old Testament speaks of God delivering His people "little by little", because sometimes it takes awhile to walk the journey of truthfulness. Our scared hearts are in hiding. His love is the remedy.

"He reveals the deep things of darkness and brings deep shadows into the light."
Job 12:22

As I was completely lost in His love during that worship service, He whispered into my heart the answer to my question. "All eyes will be on Me", He said. I am your Bride Groom. Your Lover. You, my Bride, will be so Loved by me, that you will forget the turmoil, the confusion, the strife, the questions. You will forget those around you, as this world will truly fade away. It will be you and Me. In Love. Forever.

I was looking through my wedding pictures the other day and came across my very favorite one. The same album which held some very sad pictures of adoptive and birth families crying as I walked down the aisle, also held a beautiful picture with a completely different perspective. It was the "big picture" of a huge stained glass window of JESUS standing over and above the entire wedding party. This picture reminded me that He truly does CARE and He resides over all. He is and has always been with me, gently guiding me on this journey. The journey of Truth.

Heaven can truly be Heaven when I keep this in mind. All eyes WILL be on Him, the "Author and Finisher of our faith." He loves us so much, and He alone will erase all tears from our eyes. All grief from our hearts. All confusion from our minds. All strife, all pain, all turmoil. It will truly fade into nothing as His truth and Love makes everything right. Everything.

Lord, please reveal your Love to us more and more. Help us give our hearts to You. Complete us, we pray.

Current Adoption Policy and Practice - A Comparison

© Photographer: Jojojojo | Agency: Dreamstime.com
Current Adoption Policy and Practice -
a comparison between North America and Australia

Evelyn Burns Robinson

Introduction

I am often asked about current adoption policy and practice in Australia and how this differs from policy and practice in North America. Although I have never worked in a situation where adoptions were actually taking place, I have had considerable experience in post-adoption services for the last fifteen years and, in that time, I have counselled many whose lives have been affected by adoption. I have also been able to acquire some understanding of current adoption policy and practice from colleagues in the field. During my visits to North America and through my contacts with colleagues there, I have also gained some background information on current adoption practices in North America. It seems to me that there are fundamental differences between what I perceive to be happening with domestic adoptions in Australia and what I perceive to be happening with domestic adoptions in North America.
I recognise that adoption policy is, in both places, subject to state rather than federal legislation and so there are variations in policy and practice from state to state. My comments are, therefore, of a general nature only, as I appreciate that there are many local variations. I am most familiar, of course, with policy and practice in my home state of South Australia, but I am aware that most other states in Australia operate in similar ways. Adoption policy and practice in South Australia are based on the South Australian Adoption Act (1988) and have been in effect since that act was passed in 1989. Since 1989, it has been possible to appraise and monitor the outcomes of this legislation and the act was officially reviewed in 1994. At that time, submissions were invited from members of the public, as well as groups with an interest in adoption. Some minor alterations to the act were made on the basis of this review and there have been no official moves to make any alterations to the legislation since that time.
South Australia was the first state in Australia to put in place adoption legislation which seeks to protect and support the relationship between a newborn child and his or her families of origin, as well as allowing equal access to adoption information when the adopted child becomes an adult. Other states have followed with similar adoption acts.

Adoption agencies

Private adoptions are illegal in all states in Australia. All domestic adoptions are enacted by State Government departments. There are no commercially-based adoption agencies which are licensed to manage these adoptions, which means that there are no payments of any kind connected to the adoptions of these children.
In contrast, in North America, private adoption agencies are licensed to arrange domestic adoptions. Because adoption has been allowed to acquire a commercial status in North America, there are financial advantages for agencies in arranging as many adoptions as possible. Agencies in North America, therefore, have an incentive to attract customers, just as any other business does.
Many people have expressed to me that they find the fact that money and children change hands in the same transactions to be at the very least distasteful, if not, in fact, immoral.

Expectant mothers

Expectant mothers in Australia, regardless of their circumstances, are generally encouraged and supported to prepare for raising their children. After the birth, a Parenting Payment is available from the Federal Government to anyone, regardless of their gender or marital status, who is a permanent resident of Australia and who has custody of a child. This payment, which is means-tested, is a recognition by the Australian government that children are the basis of a country's future. The government, therefore, makes financial support available to parents to assist them to provide for their children. As far as I am aware, there is no corresponding payment available at a Federal Government level in North America, although I have been advised that there may be tax benefits for parents who are in paid employment.
While there is still a degree of disapproval in some quarters towards single parenthood, there is a much greater level of acceptance in Australia than there was in the past. This has resulted in a dramatic decrease in the number of adoptions in Australia over the last thirty years. Last year in the state of South Australia (which has a population of more than two million people), for example, only one Australian-born child was adopted.
The term 'birthmother' (or 'birth mother') is currently out of favour with many of the support groups in Australia and certainly would never be used, as I have heard it used in North America, to describe an expectant mother. I have even heard the term 'birthmother-to-be' used to describe a pregnant woman. This sinister use of the term 'birthmother', before the birth has even taken place, implies that the separation of mother and child is a foregone conclusion. Expectant mothers in Australia, on the other hand, are generally encouraged to concentrate on their approaching motherhood throughout their pregnancies and no decisions regarding their child's future are expected to be made until after the birth has occurred. This is an acknowledgement of the fact that it is not possible for a mother to know how she will feel about her child until after the child has been born.

Expectant fathers

I know that, in North America, fathers who are not married to the mothers of their children have a difficult time being heard. In South Australia, an unmarried mother who is considering adoption will always be asked to name the child's father and attempts will be made to include him in the decision-making process. If the father is named on the birth certificate or if a man is recognised by the court as being the father of a child, then his consent is necessary before that child can be adopted. The father will be allowed time to establish paternity. If the father wishes to raise the child, he has the right to do so. If the mother and father do not agree with regard to the child's future, the matter may be decided by the Family Court. This would happen before any consent to adoption had been completed.

Consent to adoption

Under the South Australian Adoption Act (1988), consent to adoption cannot be given until the child is at least fourteen days old. Counselling after the birth is compulsory and must be completed at least three days prior to consent being given. The mother of the child must also be given information in writing regarding the consequences of the adoption, prior to any taking of consent. After the consent has been signed there is a period of twenty-five days during which the consent may be revoked. This period can be extended by up to fourteen days, but it cannot be shortened.
In practice, the consent to adoption is sometimes not finalised until several months after the birth. While this may not be an ideal situation, it is felt to be of prime importance that children have every opportunity to be raised within their families of origin. This will prevent the long term complexities in the lives of those children and their parents, which would occur if an adoption took place. During this period the child may remain with the mother and/or father.
I have heard of cases in North America, tragically, in which adoption consents have been signed even before the birth, or very soon after the birth. I have also heard of cases where attempts to revoke the consent the day after it had been signed have failed.

Meetings with prospective adopters

In Australia there is never any contact of any kind between expectant mothers and prospective adopters. I know that there are many who agree with me that such contacts are intrusive, disempowering to the expectant mother and potentially exploitative. They may even serve to encourage an inappropriate sense of 'ownership' in the prospective adopters, which, I believe, shows a lack of respect for and understanding of the sanctity of the mother/child bond. I am aware that this shocking practice is considered by many to be unethical.
In South Australia, only after the consent to adoption has been signed and after the twenty-five day revocation period has expired will the government department involved select adopters for the child. After this decision has been made, a meeting may take place between the prospective adopters who have been selected and the mother, if the mother requests such a meeting. Prospective adopters will not have any contact at all with the child until after the revocation period has expired and they have been notified that they have been selected to adopt.
I find it hard to understand how anyone can support the practice of having prospective adopters meet with expectant mothers and try to induce them to consent to the adoption of the child they are carrying. I believe that prospective adopters are sometimes even allowed to be present at the hospital while the birth is taking place. I was appalled to hear that this happens in North America. I find such behaviour totally inappropriate and unethical. It concerns me greatly that prospective adopters who behave in this way are not thereby considered as unsuitable to adopt.

Birth certificates

In South Australia, if the adopters are willing, they can have their names added to the child's original birth certificate instead of having a new one issued. This means that, after the adoption, the names of both the parents and the adopters appear on the same document, which is the child's legal birth certificate. The mother of the child has access to the original birth certificate from the time that the adoption takes place. The father also has access if his name appears on the birth certificate.
Regardless of the type of birth certificate issued, adopted adults in South Australia have access to their original birth certificates and other documentation pertaining to their adoption, when they are eighteen years old. The original birth certificate has details of their parents, including their names and addresses at the time of the adoption. They may have access prior to the age of eighteen with the consent of their adopters. The mother of the adopted child also has access to the replacement birth certificate when the adopted child becomes an adult, at the age of eighteen years. This document has details of the child's adopted name and the names of the adopters and their address at the time of the adoption.
These documents are also available to the children of the mothers, either if the mother gives permission or after her death and to the children of an adopted adult, if the adopted adult gives permission or after their death. Similar access to adoption information is available in all states, although in some cases, the release of information can be prevented by a person involved in the adoption. Fathers also have the right to access information about their children under certain circumstances. The legislation which allows this access has been in effect in South Australia since 1989.
I know that there are some states in North America where adopted adults are allowed to access their original birth certificates but there are no states, as far as I am aware, in which parents are allowed to access the replacement birth certificates once their children are adults. I look forward to the time when equal access to adoption information, such as exists in South Australia, will be accepted as a basic human right everywhere in North America. This is an on-going issue of social justice.

The right to raise a child

There seems to be an unhealthy attitude in North America that there are some people who are 'entitled' to raise children (whether their own or someone else's) and that there are others who are not. The result of this seems to be that, rather than adoption existing to serve needy children, adoption seems to exist to a large extent to serve needy adults. In some sectors of the media in North America, the idea that certain people have a right to acquire a child, by any means at their disposal, seems to go unchallenged. Although this misguided notion does, no doubt, also have some support in areas of the Australian media, I find this attitude to be much less prevalent in Australia than it is in North America.

Removing children from families

I was very shocked to learn that, in North America, parents who are married and already have children are being persuaded to relinquish newly-born infants. The subsequent separation of such a child from a previously intact family is causing enormous losses, for the child, for the parents, for the other children in the family, for the grandparents as well as many other members of the extended family. This does not, to my knowledge, happen anywhere in Australia.
Apparently, having children while on a low income is now perceived as such a crime in some parts of North America, that this dreadful punishment has been devised. If poverty is considered to be a disadvantage to such children, then government initiatives which address the issue of poverty would be more useful to them than replacing the complications created in their lives by poverty with the complications created by adoption.
In my professional opinion as a social worker, any prospective adopters who would be willing to acquire a child in this way, from an established family, would be considered to be unsuitable candidates to be entrusted with child-rearing responsibilities. It seems that a 'supply' of such children, who already have an entire family of relatives, is being engineered to meet the 'demand' created by affluent strangers, who wish to attempt to manufacture a family through adoption. I cannot comprehend how anyone could consider such a transaction to be anything other than exploitative and socially unjust.

Adoptions of older children

While there are many in North America who are working in family preservation programmes to prevent separations of mothers and babies, I am saddened by the fact that there are still those who believe that adoption is an appropriate outcome for older children who are unable to return to live with their families. Adoption is rarely considered to be an appropriate outcome for such children in Australia.
I have heard it said in North America that adoption can provide such children with a sense of security. In fact, in my opinion, the opposite is the case. Children such as these know who they are and to whom they are related. These realities do not change, no matter where the child is living. To deny that identity and those connections by issuing the child with a false birth certificate has, in fact, the potential to create an enormous sense of insecurity. If their identity and their family connections are so dispensable, then how can a child in this situation develop any sense of reality and permanence? We all know that being part of an adoptive family does not provide protection against abuse, death or divorce. Adoption, in fact, does not guarantee permanence of any kind and is actually an attempt to create relationships where none existed previously, rather than honouring those relationships which already exist.
In Australia, children who are unable to live with their families can be provided with a safe home environment, based on an arrangement which accepts and honours the reality of their identity and their existing relationships. This, I believe, can allow them to heal and recover without involving them in the deceit and denial associated with adoption. Some of these children have already been traumatised by the abuse or neglect which they have suffered. In my opinion, it is unnecessarily cruel to add to their trauma by subjecting them to an adoption.

Conclusion

I am not, of course, suggesting that every child in Australia lives in an ideal family environment. However, it is not considered to be appropriate in Australia to try to solve the problems of poverty and abuse in families, by removing children and arranging for them to be adopted.
Adoption is not a commercial transaction in Australia and it is gradually being replaced by other, more effective means of providing homes for children in need. This suggests to me that Australians respect the advantages in life which cannot be bought, including a sense of knowing who we are and where we fit, a sense of heritage and ancestry and a respect for the intrinsic value of family membership.
I look forward to the day when children all over the world will no longer be removed from what are perceived to be dysfunctional poor families and placed in what too often turn out to be dysfunctional affluent families.

© Evelyn Robinson, MA, Dip Ed, BSW
January, 2004

This article may be reproduced for non-commercial purposes only, providing that
it is reproduced in its entirety and without alteration.

Evelyn Robinson, who is a counsellor, speaker and author of "Adoption and Loss -
The Hidden Grief", welcomes contact from interested readers.

Clova Publications
PO Box 328
Christies Beach
South Australia 5165

Tel: +61 - 8 - 8384 5805
Fax: +61 - 8 - 8384 5815

E-mail: erobinson@austarmetro.com.au

Web site: www.clovapublications.com
http://www.ccnm-mothers.ca/English/articles/APolicyandPractice.htm

"Choose Life" License Plates are Misleading

© Photographer: Bsites | Agency: Dreamstime.com
"Choose Life" License Plates are Misleading

Pro-choice advocates are taking exception to "Choose Life" license plates because the opposing political viewpoint "Pro-Choice" is being disallowed. But even from the pro-life standpoint, the proceeds from these tags are being misspent.

Marion, IA (PRWEB) May 25, 2004 -- In Manatee County, Florida county commissioners argued whether the funds raised from the sale of "Choose Life" license plates could be used by agencies that did not provide adoption services exclusively. The issue was not that the agencies provided abortion services of any kind but only that these agencies included services to help mothers and families who want to keep their babies. The end result of the discussions was that no funding was allocated to help keep families together. The message to women who fear they may not receive moral or other support as a mother is this: Get an abortion or you may have to watch your own son or daughter being raised by someone else.

The lifelong effects on adoptees and on mothers who have lost their sons and daughters to adoption are known, but not well advertised. Perhaps the most telling evidence of the suffering a family that loses a child to adoption is that these families tend to keep any subsequent children. According to statistics compiled on the National Adoption Information Clearinghouse website, most of the mothers whose children are adopted-out "... come from intact families...which have not experienced teenage pregnancies by other family members." (Stolley, 1993)

In her paper "Adoption and Loss: The Hidden Grief" available on line, social worker Evelyn Burns Robinson compares adoption grief to Kenneth Doka's concept of disenfranchised grief which occurs when a loss is not recognized or socially supported: "Doka says that people who have experienced any type of loss often feel anger, guilt, sadness, depression, hopelessness and numbness and that in cases of disenfranchised grief, these feelings can persist for a very long time... mourners whose grief is disenfranchised are by virtue of this cut off from social supports and so have few opportunities to express and resolve their grief and the result can be that they feel alienated from their community."

Robinson states: "Mothers who have lost children through adoption ... tend, in the main, to report that their sadness and anger have increased with time."

Many people may not know that in adoption, loss is experienced by the natural parents, the adopters and by the adoptee. In an address for Catholic Charities USA's 1996 National Maternity and Adoption Conference in San Antonio, Texas, Catholic Priest and adoptee Rev. Thomas F. Brosnan discussed these losses and stated: "In my biased opinion the greatest Loss is suffered by the adopted person."

Don't children deserve a chance to remain with their mothers and their natural families? Using the "child needs two married parents" argument is a bit weak in this era. Couples divorce and that certainly includes those who adopt, who frequently have issues in their relationship related to their infertility problems. At the same time unmarried mothers often marry within a few years after their child is born, sometimes to their child's real father. That's true whether the child is kept or adopted-out. Even if they never marry, a child's mother and father are still his/her mother and father. The kept child will have not only his/her own mother, but will most likely have his/her father, grandparents and plenty of other family to love him/her.

With people who are past retirement age and single people adopting, who can blindly assert that children will be "better off" with strangers than with their own family?

Some of the funds from the license plate sales are going towards maternity homes, which the supporters call a "safe haven" for women. Evidently a "safe haven" for women is a lot like a cage for a chicken where the eggs all roll to the front where they can be easily collected and neither the chicken nor the egg gets a choice. Yes, there are maternity homes that promote choices: The choices they provide are the selection of prospective adopters from a listing of advertisements provided to a frightened mother and possibly also to her child's father. Like most ads, there's lots of sales pitch and very little reality involved. Most other parents get more real information in advance about a baby-sitter than these na�ve parents are allowed to have about someone who may become a permanent caregiver for their child.

A temporary situation can be overcome and should never become an excuse for an agency or anyone else to jump in and take someone's child. There is ample evidence that indicates a very high emotional risk for mothers and their children separated by adoption.

I hope those who contribute to these license plates will discontinue their support unless the money starts going towards something other than separating family members to obtain babies. No one owes his or her child to anyone.

Laurie Frisch
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2004/05/prweb128565.htm

"Protecting the Rights of Mothers and Natural Families"

Trauma May Imprint DNA

Childhood trauma may leave a lasting imprint not just on the psyche but also in the DNA. This news comes from McGill University and the Suicide Brain Bank, a Quebec-based organization that carried out autopsies on suicide victims who had been abused as kids. Across the board, their brains showed DNA modifications that made them particularly sensitive to stress. Although gene variations are primarily inherited at conception, the findings show that environmental impacts can also introduce them later on. “The idea that abuse changes how genes function opens a new window for behavioral and drug therapy,” says study leader and neuroscientist Patrick McGowan.

During periods of adversity, the brain triggers release of cortisol, a hormone responsible for the fight-or-flight response. Due to differential gene expression associated with stress, the brains of child-abuse victims had lower levels of glucocorticoid receptors, McGowan found. Cortisol normally binds to these receptors; with fewer of them present, there is more cortisol and less resilience to feelings of stress.

In his study, McGowan reviewed medical records and police reports and interviewed family members to determine whether a subject was abused early in life. He then examined the subjects’ brain tissues and found that among those who had been abused, glucocorticoid-receptor expression was reduced by 40 percent. “If we can identify how these changes occur, we can identify those at high risk and ultimately find ways to treat them,” McGowan says. (see http://discovermagazine.com/2010/jan-feb/061)

*I've heard one definition of "to abuse" as "to use for the wrong purpose." Adoptees suffer profound trauma from early separation from their mothers, and are then transferred to strangers with whom they share no genetic markers. Their identity and history is stripped from them through "sealed records" laws. All to fulfill the demand of baby-buyers in a billion-dollar industry. This, my friends, could not be a better definition of "abuse."

Research done by John Bowlby and many others have provided adequate legitimacy to the effects of early separation of mother & baby. Scientists are just now beginning to "prove" these early impacts and how they should be heeded for "best practice" reforms. It seems they are just now beginning to impact the fields of medicine and neonatology but in the field (business) of adoption they continue to be dismissed.

How Can Animal Rights Outweigh This?

Voting closes on March 12, 2010

This idea - to return the right to their Original Birth Certificates
to Adult Adoptees - has been around for a long time; but, at one time
it wasn't even an issue and in other countries the idea of falsifying
a legal document such as a Birth Certificate is totally unheard of.

Some folks have commented that they have more accurate information on
their dog's registration papers than adoptees have on their "amended"
birth certificates. .. how very true! Falsifying a dog's registration
papers is a punishable act, but falsifying a human's birth certificate
is not only done but condoned by the government. With all we know about
genetics how can we even
entertain the idea that it's "ok" to deny someone their personal
heritage?

The original competition had 2500 ideas and ours made it into the top
60 to compete in the final round.

At one point we were in 4th place and then started dropping.
Yesterday morning (3-8-2010) we were in 12th place - for the first
time we are out of the Top Ten. Right now both "Legalizing Marijuana"
and "Animal Rights" have more votes than restoring the right
6 million Americans their original birth certificates, identity,
genealogic and medical histories. It makes me wonder about the true
value of humanity in our nation.

Our idea needs (NEEDS) to be in the top 10 to be presented in
Washington DC. Please vote for equal rights for everyone.

http://tinyurl.com/Equal-Access-4-All

Thank you ALL!

The Broken Hearted

"...He has sent me to comfort the brokenhearted. To tell those who grieve that the time of the Lord's rest and favor has come. To all who mourn he will give a crown of beauty for ashes, a joyous blessing, and festive praise instead of despair...For in all our suffering He also suffered, and He personally rescued us. In His love and mercy He redeemed us (bought us back). He lifted us up and carried us through all the years." Isaiah 61

 

 

I recently experienced a drama production based on "Affabel" by John Bevere that spoke volumes to my heart.

It featured the lives of five friends as they made their way through life and then faced eternity. The character "Faintheart" was an innocent, sweet girl who was brutally betrayed and hurt by another. Her innocence and pure heart was marred by pain, and she sadly grew bitter and joyless.

It was so hard to watch as this happened. John 10:10 says "The thief (satan) has come to steal, kill, and destroy, but I (Jesus) have come to bring life and life more abundant." Oh, how we see this in our world of suffering and injustice.

God's love is so passionate that He tore open the windows of Heaven and ran down to Earth wrapped in garments of suffering and love. He cares deeply when one of us is hurt. So much so, that he took upon his own body our very pains and sorrows, so we could receive His healing and peace. But what a journey we walk in this fallen world, as the enemy of our souls uses every diabolical tactic imaginable to keep us from this Truth.

The "Orphan Spirit" and "Self-Protection"

The one human "Faintheart" trusted to care for her proved untrustworthy.
She felt alone and conflicted and learned to protect her orphaned heart at all cost, fearing more loss and abandonment. That fear kept her from entrusting herself to the only One who loved her completely, and sadly, she ultimately faced eternity without her only source of healing and Life.

Divine Justice

"...then I realized that my heart was bitter and I was all torn up inside, YET I still belong to You." Psalm 73
 

It is so hard to entrust our broken hearts to pure Love and trust Him to bring justice instead of ourselves. But we can because He promises recompense for all our suffering, and justice upon that which harms us.
He takes care of us better than we can, especially since our brokenness paralyzes us emotionally.  He will "make our cause shine like the dawn" and bestow on us "beauty for ashes" when our hearts are mangled.  We can forgive others because we know forgiveness is NOT excusing them at all.  It is releasing them (along with the hurt they cause) to a Father God who gave His very life to restore us to the same condition we could have been before the pain and injustice occurred.

A perfect Judge. A perfect Father. Everything we always needed and never got.

In my weakness I knew it was impossible for this orphaned heart to trust anyone. But I'm so thankful for this simple prayer that literally changed my life. "Lord, teach me to trust You." He has been faithful to do that and continues to heal this broken heart of mine little by little, one beautiful Word at a time.

"...trade these ashes in for beauty...lay every burden at His feet...breathe in the life He won for me...it's here I'm made complete."

State to Apologize for Harsh Adoption Acts

State to apologise for 'harsh' adoption acts

DANIEL EMERSON, The West Australian
March 5, 2010

WA is poised to be the first State to publicly acknowledge the aggressive adoption practices which resulted in thousands of mothers being unlawfully separated from their babies after giving birth out of wedlock.

Health Minister Kim Hames has revealed he is personally overseeing the creation of a memorial to the families affected by State hospital and welfare practices during the 1940s to the early 1980s.

Dr Hames is also likely to read an apology on behalf of the State Government either in Parliament or at a dedication ceremony opening the memorial at a yet to be determined location. Dr Hames said many women and families had been emotionally damaged and he wanted to help them heal.

"You look back on those attitudes of the day and wonder how we could be so harsh," he said.

"Things like taking children away from their mothers as soon as they were born and not letting them see or touch them. We are apologising in the same way as with the Stolen Generation, recognising that those practices . . . were ones that today wouldn't be acceptable and that they caused considerable hurt and harm."

Experts say tens of thousands of WA babies were taken illegally when their unmarried mothers were prevented from seeing, touching, naming or bonding with their children immediately after birth.

The practice, which has been linked to post traumatic stress, was illegal under the Adoption of Children Acts but widespread at public hospitals throughout Australia.

Also common but illegal was asking women to sign adoption papers earlier than five days after the birth.

Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital apologised for their "ill treatment" of unmarried mothers in May last year.

Christine Cole, convenor of the NSW-based Apology Alliance which lobbies on the issue, said a memorial dedicated by a State health minister would be the most significant acknowledgment by authorities "probably anywhere in the world".

"These adoptions happened for two key reasons," she said. "First, it saved the State money because if a child was adopted they didn't have to pay for foster care or mothers' benefits.

"The second was this eugenics-based notion that young women who gave birth out of wedlock were feeble minded and unfit mothers."

Australian Medical Association WA president Gary Geelhoed said the memorial would be symbolic but "very, very important".

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/breaking/6889508/state-to-apologise-for-harsh-adoption-acts/

"We have a situation here..."

My son gives me such joy and laughter with the hilarious things he says and does every day. Today while jabbering away in his car seat, he came out with the brand new phrase (I have no idea where he heard it) "We have a situation here..."(voice inflection and all, kind of like "Houston, we have a problem". lol

I finally just had to break out into laughter because TRULY we did "have a situation" just a few minutes earlier, that was quite embarrassing for this shy Momma.

All I have to say is if you have young kids to beware "The Bachelor"! I don't watch much tv at all, but just happened to "catch" the last few episodes of The Bachelor. This particular one (in my opinion) was akin to watching a train wreck but not being able to make myself turn away. And that is frustrating. I kept telling myself, "Why are you watching this absurdity?" but then had to stay tuned to see what would happen. No more! lol

Anyway, my husband and I were watching the last episode together while Andrew was running around the living room playing. I didn't think he was even paying attention. Boy was I wrong. After all that kissing, kissing, and more kissing, Andrew must have seen Daddy lean over and give Mommy a little peck on the cheek and the little green monster of jealousy reared his head. It launched Andrew in high gear, quickly ascending on top of Mommy & Daddy attacking us with kisses. He learns quick (too quick) and wasn't happy with just a little peck on the cheek or even the lips. He wanted to go all out and KISS with all his might. Oh my gosh. We just got the biggest laugh, as Daddy had to literally pull my son off me. But he is strong and wouldn't take no for an answer. Even with me laughing hilariously and flailing like a monkey trying to get away. lol

Well, we got a good laugh and just "blew it off" UNTIL today when I picked Andrew up from school. They are studying Daniel & the Lions Den in his classroom and when the parents walk in at the bell, all the kids "surprise" us by giving a big "Roar" greeting. I was in a hurry to get Andrew to his speech group so I picked him up to try to rush out the door and to the car. He was still in his "lion-mode" and gave me a big kiss on the cheek with a "roar". It was cute, but then he must have remembered "The Bachelor" incident and decided now was the time to attack Mommy with "The Bachelor" kiss. He's holding my face with both hands and won't let up. Literally. I'm trying to turn my head and talk while being attacked with sticky fingers, lips, mouth, teeth, the works. (He has sensory issues and NOTHING is gentle, if you get the picture). So through nervous laughter and slurred speech ("Andrew, kiss me on the cheek!") I run out the door with the teachers
staring in disbelief. How embarrassing. No time for explanation. Just escape. lol

His classroom has one of those wonderful one-way mirrors so I can watch the interaction without him seeing me. It is comical and a little sad when his Momma has to pray against anxiety as I see him jabbering away to his teachers and them looking at him with the same confused look I give him when he comes out with some of the interesting things he says. He's sometimes more in his own little fantasy world of play than reality and boy does he have an imagination. I hope I'm not the only Mother of a little one that experiences these things! Please tell me I'm not.

I'm in a Women's Bible study by Beth Moore right now called "Breaking Free". It is amazing. I'm getting so many encouraging scriptures and meditations that I can hardly keep up. I've been writing little notes here and there that I want to share on this blog and am hoping for the time to sit down and write.

One thing that came to mind regarding this incident today is the scripture in Song of Solomon that says "Let Him kiss me with the kisses of His mouth." It seems in today's world everything is so sexualized that purity is very hard to find, but what this scripture speaks of is having complete and open intimacy (open hearts) with our Heavenly Father. He is so Holy and Pure and His Love is not only unconditional but overwhelming. Kind of like the sweet kisses my son was lavishing upon me. Pure Love. He loves us so much.

So much that the Bible says He is jealous FOR us. For our hearts. He cares deeply when our broken hearts hold us back from trusting Him as the good Father He truly is.

Lord, let me come near to You with an open heart and receive the Love you have for me. I'm so thankful for the lessons you teach us through every day life. As my son says, "We have a situation here!" What a great situation to have!