Dan Rather Reports - "Adopted or Abducted?"

Anonymous Father's Day Official Trailer

Crisis Pregnancy Centers Creating "Artificial Orphans"

Crisis Pregnancy Centers Creating "Artificial Orphans" by Kate Harding You know those "crisis pregnancy centers" that set up shop near abortion clinics, pretending to offer "options"? Turns out they won't just terrify you into having the baby; they'll terrify you into handing it over to them. Kathryn Joyce, author of Quiverfull: Inside the Christian Patriarchy Movement, writes in The Nation: While there is growing awareness of how CPCs hinder abortion access, the centers have a broader agenda that is less well known: they seek not only to induce women to "choose life" but to choose adoption, either by offering adoption services themselves... or by referring women to Christian adoption agencies. Far more than other adoption agencies, conservative Christian agencies demonstrate a pattern and history of coercing women to relinquish their children. It's like this: You're single, pregnant, and scared. Maybe you're even Christian, in some form and to some extent. You find these nice Christian people who tell you they can help. If you're still considering abortion at this point, they'll show you gruesome films and lay on the guilt and shame until you're not. And then, once you've agreed to give birth, they start telling you there's no way you can hack single motherhood — perhaps adding that God disapproves of the sex you've already had and will be even more pissed if you raise this kid without a father or a marriage certificate — and explain that keeping your baby would be selfish and sinful, because there are wealthy, childless Christian couples desperate to give it everything you can't. Or, as Carol Jordan, who got sucked in by a CPC in 1999, puts it: "[O]nce you say you won't kill it, they ask, What can you give it? You have nothing to offer, but here's a family that goes on a cruise every year." While waiting to give birth, Jordan was taken into the home of a "shepherding family" the agency hooked her up with, where — despite the fact she hadn't yet decided on adoption — she was referred to exclusively as a "birth mother." Says Jordan, "I felt like a walking uterus for the agency." After she settled on an adoptive couple and gave birth, Jordan cried all day and didn't think she could relinquish the baby. She called her shepherding parents and asked if she could bring the baby home. They refused, chastising Jordan sharply. The counselor told the couple Jordan was having second thoughts and brought them, sobbing, into her recovery room. The counselor warned Jordan that if she persisted, she'd end up homeless and lose the baby anyway. Jordan signed the adoption papers and went back to live with the shepherding family, who were "celebrating and asked why Jordan wouldn't stop crying." 5 days later she left, and when she later called the agency looking for the counseling they promised, her shepherding mother told her "You're the one who spread your legs and got pregnant out of wedlock. You have no right to grieve for this baby." Many other women, says Joyce, have had similar experiences. Lured in with promises of support, counseling, a home, money, and an open adoption that will allow them to keep in touch with their children, they later realize that all the CPC folks ever wanted them to do was have the baby and get lost. These coercive operations are part of a larger movement in the evangelical community to promote adoption in ways that show just as much respect for pregnant women's autonomy as you'll find at an anti-abortion rally. It's not just that they want to "save" babies, apparently — they want to own them. Healthy white ones, anyway. As Lynn Harris puts it over at Broadsheet: It's not hard to connect certain dots. First, there's the notion of single motherhood, for anyone who is not Bristol Palin, as a threat to the "proper" two-parent Christian family. There's also the conservative Christian effort to promote embryo donation as "embryo adoption," not only as a bolster to fetal "personhood," but also (it occurs to me now) to steer available embryos toward conservative Christian families. There's "race panic." (Ah: That answers my second question.) And of course... there's Quiverfull, the extreme Christian movement determined to create, by birth or adoption, as many "arrows" as possible to prepare for battle in the culture war. So, if you ask me, these people are not just coercing. They are recruiting. And it doesn't matter if you're in a committed relationship with the father, or even an evangelical Christian yourself. Karen Fetrow was both those things when she got pregnant at 24 (and has now been married to the father for 16 years), but was convinced to relinquish her baby because the Christian agency she approached for support "told her that women who sought to parent were on their own." After that, "for thirteen years Fetrow couldn't look at an infant without crying." That's the part that's often left out of discussions of adoption as a happy alternative to abortion — such as Obama's speech at Notre Dame this summer or William Saletan and Steven Waldman's fool-headed suggestion that offering women $1,000 to choose adoption is a brilliant "common ground" solution, both of which Joyce points out. One of my best friends from college gave a baby up for adoption at 17, and having seen how that loss tormented her for years afterward, I have never been able to stomach arguments that adoption is necessarily a better choice for the mother than abortion or single parenthood. As Amy Benfer put it in her takedown of Saletan and Waldman: The same people who ask women to consider a three-month fetus that may only vaguely resemble a proto-human on an ultrasound as a "baby" seem to be utterly indifferent when it comes to asking a woman to disregard her connection to the actual baby she has nurtured in her womb for nine months, delivered through the mostly torturous process of labor, and held at the moment of birth, with that familiar gooey feeling of counting fingers and toes and recognizing grandpa's eyes, dad's nose and her lips. At that point, "it" is not a product for exchange, but that woman's child. Most women, having gone through that experience known in every other circumstance as "the miracle of birth," will end up looking for any way possible to keep their babies and raise them well. They will need real long-term solutions: scholarships, day-care solutions and other programs that help them to get through school and get good jobs to support their families. Instead, the ones who turn to CPCs for support are abandoned the moment the umbilical cord is cut and the baby can be spirited away to some stranger's quiver. Never mind if they want the baby. Never mind if they wanted an abortion months earlier. As soon as they stumbled into a CPC, what they wanted ceased to be a factor, because CPCs are not in the business of helping pregnant women but, as Joyce says critics put it: "separat[ing] willing biological parents from their offspring, artificially producing 'orphans' for Christian parents to adopt." If you think that sounds a lot like the "Baby Scoop" era of the mid-twentieth century, when at least 1.5 million pregnant girls and women were hidden away, often in maternity homes, until they gave birth to babies they didn't dare raise in a society that wouldn't tolerate single mothers, well, you're onto something. Says Joyce of that time: "The coercion was frequently brutal, entailing severe isolation, shaming, withholding information about labor, disallowing mothers to see their babies and coercing relinquishment signatures while women were drugged or misled about their rights." In other words, pretty much what CPCs are doing now. Oh, and in case you haven't vomited yet, under the Bush administration, CPCs received over $60 million in federal funding. Have a pleasant day. http://jezebel.com/5351936/crisis-pregnancy-centers-creating-artificial-orphans

Sublime Escape This is me, stashed inside my pain, hiding, pushing back the deeply dark corners, inching in on me. Crawling, creeping, Silently planting refuse around my brain. Rest, breathe, breathe and pray. The air around, strains and punches, grappling, fighting my chest for release, burning my swollen throat. Squeezing, shoving, begging my lungs for release. Bathe me in healing prayer. Tired heart, screams in my chest, barely noticed, begging, crying for someone to hear, sinking quietly away. Weeping, gasping, dissolving me in my beautiful pain. Will this scar still ache tomorrow? Nothing left, bashed against the essence of me, clinging, holding tight, to my sublime escape, no one can take away. Cleaving, clutching, embracing the quiet voice, awakening my hope. Take me to breathe and rest and pray. Bathe me in your healing embrace. Hold my scars when they ache and moan. Take me to a place where your love and strength dance, a place where crimson flow washes white, over my bankrupt soul. Copyright 2011, Christi Armstrong

"The 'Guillotine' Effect of Adoption" by Myst

The "Guillotine" effect of Adoption by Myst, who blogs at: "Living in the Shadows" Often, I have read the various search phrases that bring people to my blog and think about posts I could do regarding those search terms and then I just don't get around to writing them. Tonight, I saw this search term: "how does the 1955 adoption act have the effect of a statutory guillotine" and felt it was a good question and relevant to my blog because I do use the word guillotine often when I post/speak about adoption law. The word "guillotine" is quite graphic and conjures images of gruesome decapitations. The guillotine offered a swift execution, a clean decapitation if you will - more pleasant than previous methods of decapitations with axes, swords and the like which would take at least two blows or more depending on the prisoner. The guillotine was quick and efficient, and ensured there was no suffocation. Yes, gruesome but the crucial part to me here is the effect of the guillotine - and how it relates to adoption. When a person is adopted, they are completely cut out of their family's life - the law makes its as if they were never related. This severing is the same as what happens with a guillotine. Swift, clean, brutal. When a mother places or loses her child to adoption, she becomes a complete stranger to that child. As if they were never connected. As if those months of nurturing, of loving, of worrying never happened. This is reflected in the falsified birth certificate which replaces the mother's name with that of the adoptive mother's - and it is made out, in the law, as if this stranger was the one who gave birth. Mother and child, one of the most sacred relationships of all time, recognised as such outside adoption, is made out to be non-existent with a rubber stamp and a few signatures. Adoption, like a blade, cuts that most precious relationship away from both. Thus, the Guillotine. The child experiences this (besides other experiences) by way of his or her family tree being brutally cut off and all those who went before her or him, all those who existed in her/his family for generations stretching back in time, wiped away. By law, adopted persons are magically grafted into their adoptive families' heritage... negating the fact they have another family, another heritage - one that flows through their veins, shows in their personalities, in their being. The guillotine of adoption law wipes it all out. The so called ruse of Open Adoption does not change this. Given open adoption does not actually exist legally, there is no recognition of a mother who wants to see her child and be part of her child's life. Because in the eyes of the law, she is no one. She is nothing. She is merely a stranger - to the law, she may as well be someone walking down the street. The fact her connection to her child is more than anyone will ever experience with her child ever in their lives vanishes, poof! Because the law of adoption dictates this. Adoption law is not a loving law. There is no love, no compassion in this brutal hacking of a family. Adoption law is anti-family in a way. It does not care for the best interests and welfare of a child, it only serves the best interests and welfare of adults. Regardless of the intentions of those who seek to adopt, the law of adoption is not child centric. It is cruel. It is barbaric in many places. And it supports dishonesty in the way it is set up. Love is not cutting a child out of her/his family. Love is not re-writing a factual document to reflect a mis-truth. Love is not pretending one gave birth to another mother's baby (my daughter's adoptress created a labour and birth story. Truly. And then denied it when I confronted them.). Love is not applying a guillotine to a child's life and severing centuries of family history. Love is none of those things and adopters who fool themselves into thinking that adoption is loving and compassionate are not seeing the full picture and are only seeing what they want to see. When I lost Amber, I wrote endless journal posts about how I felt my head had been cut off and my heart had been torn out. Again, the guillotine. Amber is lost to me. Legally, it is as if she never existed. Regardless of what ethics and morality says, regardless of what my hospital records show, the truth is, by law, my daughter, whom I carried inside me, in my heart, in my spirit, in my soul, is a stranger to me. That is the law. That is the reality. That is Adoption. And that is the guillotine effect I speak of so often. Reunion will not change this for us. She will still be seen as the child of those who brutally took her from me, by law. As their daughter. I will be the stranger. Not them as they should be. I have been severed from her life, and she from mine. And just like a decapitation, there is no way to put us back together again.

Reunion Despite "Sealed" Records

First Mother Forum: Adoption in the Netherlands is "Undutch"

[Birth Mother,] First Mother Forum: Adoption in the Netherlands is "undutch" while Ame...: The Netherlands Relinquishing a child for adoption in the Netherlands is considered "inhumane, unwomanly, undutch, not done," accordin...

Family Ties: Adult Adoptee Access -- A Civil Right Long Overdue...

Family Ties: Adult Adoptee Access -- A Civil Right Long Overdue...: It is hard to believe sometimes that in this year 2012 we in New Jersey are still fighting a political battle over the access of adult adopt...

Who's Your Daddy? Paternity Testing and the Nature of Fatherhood

Not just the lab company benefits from legislation of this type, but also the child! Every American should be ensured by law a FACTUAL original birth certificate which states the actual DNA/FATHER/MOTHER who contributed to their DNA. Adoption and surrogacy has not caught up with ethics and until they do, they should be illegal. Let's, for a chance, actually look at the rights of the children being created by adoption, surrogacy, reproductive medicine, and ENSURE by law they have access to their TRUE parentage, whether or not they are raised by them. It is a basic civil right being violated every day. www.PeachNeitherHereNorThere.blogspot.com
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

06231967

Another Blow...

Another blow to fatherhood: IVF mothers can name ANYONE as 'father' on birth certificate
By Fiona Macrae
01st March 2009

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1158322/Another-blow-fatherhood-IVF-mothers-ANYONE-father-birth-certificate.html

Family values were under attack again last night with the news that single women having IVF will be able to name anyone they like as their baby's father on the birth certificate.
New regulations mean that a mother could nominate another woman to be her child's 'father'.
The 'father' does not need to be genetically related to the baby, nor be in any sort of romantic relationship with the mother.
Critics have sounded a warning about the ability of single women who have successful IVF treatment to nominate a person as the 'father'
Critics said a woman could list her best friend on the birth certificate. The word 'father' may even be replaced with the phrase 'second parent'.
The second parent, who will have to consent to being named, will take on the legal and moral responsibilities of parenthood.
This raises the spectre of a legal minefield in which female 'fathers' will fight for visitation rights and be chased for child support payments if their fragile relationship with the mother breaks down.
The changes, due to come in on April 6, will apply to many of the women who have IVF using sperm from anonymous donors.
The regulations are part of the controversial Embryology Bill passed by Parliament last year. The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority said they will give lesbian couples in civil partnerships who undergo IVF the same rights as married heterosexual couples.

An unmarried man whose girlfriend has fertility treatment will also find it easier to claim full parental rights.

The new rules state: 'The women receiving treatment with donor sperm (or embryos created with donor sperm) can consent to any man or woman being the father or second parent.' The only exemption is close blood relatives.

Critics said the change would lead to the role of father being downgraded to the one of godfather and warned that the child would be the one to lose out.

Baroness Deech, a former chairman of the HFEA, said the practice would lead to the ' falsification of the birth certificate'.
She said: 'This is putting the rights of the parents way above those of the child. It is absurd that anyone can be named as the father or the second parent.'

Dr Trevor Stammers, a GP and lecturer in healthcare ethics, questioned the strength of the relationships or friendships between the mother and 'father'.

He said: 'There is no doubt from sociological evidence accumulated over the past few years that children do best in a two-parent married family with heterosexual couples being the married parents.

'It probably will be the child that is the loser but by the time we find that out, in 15 or 16 years, a huge amount of damage will have been done.'

Geraldine Smith, Labour MP for Morecambe, said a birth certificate should be a true record of a child's genetic heritage. She added: 'I don't think the state should collude with parents to conceal the true genetic identity.'

David Jones, a professor of bioethics, likened the role of second parent to that of godparent. He added: 'This sounds like social engineering on the hoof.'

Philippa Taylor, of Christian charity CARE, said: 'We are going to get to the point where a birth certificate is not going to be a true statement of anyone's biological heritage.'
Former Tory leader Iain Duncan Smith said a father played an essential role in the development of a child. He added: 'The present Government seems not to care a damn about families.

'Teenage pregnancy is on the increase, abortion is on the increase, family breakdown is at record levels and we have got a growing number of dysfunctional children that are the product of broken homes.

'The lesson seems to be loud and clear to me that fathers are required.'

Tory MP Ann Widdecombe said the change would destroy the 'basic nature' of a man and a woman bringing up a child together as parents.

Other critics said that Labour's family and benefit policies support and reward single parents at the expense of couples and have sidelined marriage as a lifestyle choice with no value for children.

The HFEA said it was unlikely for the actual sperm donor to be named on the birth certificate because the sample is normally obtained from a sperm bank.

It added that the welfare of the child would always come first and any person nominated as a second parent would have counselling to ensure they understood the implications.

How He Loves

Tonight at church a young man prayed for me and as I went to sit back down, I almost felt like "this is too good to believe", when all of a sudden, I realized that I felt immediately better.  Sometimes we deal with something so long and lose hope that it will ever change.  The enemy of our soul uses our failings & shortcomings against us and wears us down with discouragement.  We give up and then feel even more condemned. 

That's exactly where I've been the last few weeks.  But God loved us so much, He sent His Son to die for us, "while we were YET sinners".  His love and healing isn't dependent on our perfection or worthiness, because we fall so far short, anyway.

Lord, thank you for your FREE GIFT of eternal life, salvation, and healing.   The Greek word for "salvation" is SOZO, and it means deliverance, protection, & healing ~ all that Jesus died for.  HE took our sins, our sicknesses, our pain ~ so that "By HIS stripes we are healed".  Thank you, Jesus, for loving us that much.

There were over 100 tornadoes in Oklahoma last night, a literal "outbreak".  Sometimes it feels like there are so many things coming against us, that there is no way out.  As I was thanking God tonight for touching me, the thought came into my mind, "yeah, but what about all those OTHER things that seem insurmountable?" 

Immediately it felt like God answered back, "Believe me, if I can take care of one, I can take care of them all."

"Bless the Lord, oh my soul, and forget not all of His benefits. He forgives ALL of our sins, and heals ALL of our diseases. He redeems our lives from destruction, and crowns us with lovingkindness and tender mercies. Our youth is renewed like the eagles." Psalm 103:2-5

For everything the enemy can throw at us, God's love and power is so much stronger. He wants to release an "outbreak" of healing.  Lord, forgive us for letting fear and doubt & feelings of unworthiness, trap us in storms of discouragement.  Thank you for sending waves of grace and mercy over our lives and our land, Father.  Release your healing and wholeness, we pray.

"Mr. Caterpillar": The Saga

© Photographer: Mkoudis | Agency: Dreamstime.com

It's amazing how every day "life" shares wisdom, if I am just open to listen.

One of my favorite times of the day is when I get to pick my son up from school. We are so blessed that he attends what I consider the BEST preschool in our hometown. Truly. He loves it, is growing and developing, feels loved, and shines the biggest smile both when he walks in the classroom each morning, and when I pick him up in the afternoon. I so wish he could get his college degree from this school! lol

Anyway, this afternoon, after my brief bask in feeling his little arms around my neck in our "pick me up from school hug", my son eagerly lifted his index finger to my face, proudly displaying a smiley face that had been carefully drawn with a marker. "Look Mommy", he excitedly said. "Mr. Caterpillar!" I drew my head back to focus on this tiny miracle of a finger he was so proud of, brought it to my lips, and gently kissed the smiling "caterpillar", which matched the smile on both our faces. What a joy he is.

We hurriedly made it down the hall and to the bathroom for our traditional "potty" stop before heading home. And that's where this tragedy began. In the stress of trying to hurry through the routine and make sure our hands were washed, I failed to take the time to really listen. You see, being premature, my son struggles with communication. He tries so hard, and is doing an amazing job. But it takes extra patience to encourage his voice, his words, for him to get his complete thought out, instead of being overcome with frustration and emotion in trying. Any time we are pressed for time or feeling the least bit stressed, it complicates this for him. That alone motivates me to grow as a person and parent. I take nothing for granted. Nothing. Because he was so small.

But in trying to get out of the bathroom quick, to let the next person in, I hurriedly "helped" him wash his hands and couldn't understand why he was so frantically protesting. "It's just dirt and we have to wash it off," I impatiently exclaimed, as Mr. Caterpillar's eyes and mouth (too tiny and unrecognizable to even jog my memory of the loving moment of our introduction just moments ago in the classroom) disappeared down the drain. Finally able to spit it out, "But Mommy, his eyes!", it was too late. "Mr. Caterpillar" was gone. In the minutes that ensued of anger and rebuke, I knew my son's heart was broken.

I so pray he will learn to more easily cry when he is hurt or disappointed. For his own sake. It hurts (understatement) to imagine what he must have endured those months in the NICU, along with the pain of being separated from his Mother. Jesus, fill him with Your "intensive care" to completely heal his heart and emotions, I pray.

After profusely apologizing, we finally made it out to the car. I rejoiced inside to see Andrew's sweet smile erupt as we artfully re-discovered "Mr. Caterpillar", his beloved friend. Not only did we draw "Mr. Caterpillar", but Mr. Caterpillar's Mommy & Daddy! What a love-fest as they all hugged and kissed in sweet reunion. MMMAUH!

This not so insignificant incident reminded me in so many ways of adoption.
Adoptee's very identities are legally washed down the drain, through "sealed records", yet how many times are they dismissed in the struggle to communicate, when this is such a primal (even preverbal) part of their experience?

Why aren't they heard when protesting "sealed records", or the unethical practice of "adoption" in today's society, which essentially equates to selling humans and sealing their identities from them? The outrageous financial transactions, unethical practices & laws surrounding adoption (fees, marketing and "incentives", and "sealed records") are screaming this truth, if only someone will listen. Thank God for the six US states who have listened (even The Child Welfare League of America supports adoptee access legislation) and passed laws restoring the civil right of adult adoptees to obtain their original birth certificate.

Is it too hard to hear because we are trying to accomplish a different agenda?

Even "Mr. Caterpillar" needed a little help to find himself out of the drain. Maybe now he can become a butterfly!

"A little child shall lead them."

Thank you, God, for such great teachers! Help us all learn to listen, I pray.

Adoption Truth: "Yes, I Gave Up My Baby"

An insightful article written by a First Mother at Adoption Truth..."Yes, I Gave Up My Baby."

Blue Springs Woman Reunites With Siblings

Blue Springs Woman Reunites With Siblings - Video - KMBC Kansas City

Adoption: Trauma that Lasts a Lifetime

Adoption: Trauma that Lasts a Life Time

Vicki M. Rummig

They just cannot understand. The perfect child Mr. & Mrs. Smith adopted 15 years ago is now skipping school, talking back, experimenting with drugs, and is involved in a sexual relationship with her 20-year-old drug addicted boyfriend. Until a year ago she always had good grades and enjoyed spending time with her parents; she was the ideal child. They have sought treatment from a family therapist. Nevertheless, they just cannot seem to get through to her. There have been no new stressors in the household. What could be the problem?

For many years adoption has been viewed as a perfect arrangement for all involved. What has not been taken into account are the emotional effects adoption has on all members involved, most specifically, for the purpose of this paper, the adoptee. These effects, or issues, can be managed as long as they are recognized and acknowledged. Adoptees’ psychological issues need to be addressed by mental health professionals in order to recognize and effectively treat symptoms of low self-esteem, lack of trust, and dissociation.

The adoptees’ trauma begins the moment she is separated from her birth mother. Some psychologists believe that an infant is not able to differentiate her mother until at least two months of age. At the same time they believe that the infant does not know she is her own entity (Kaplan, 1978). What do mental health professionals believe the infant thinks for these first two months? They will suggest that she is in some type of limbo, that she does not have the capacity to think or know until two months of age. Yet, she somehow knows to cry when she is uncomfortable and how to ingest her food. Psychologists will call this instinct, but we should also look at the possibility of the newborn instinctively knowing who her mother is. After all, they were connected for 40 weeks.

Since an infant does not see herself as a separate entity, we must believe that she sees herself as part of the person she was physically attached and bonded to for 40 weeks (Verrier, 1993, chap. 2). When separated from the one thing to which she has connected, the infant will feel she has lost part of herself.

Many doctors and psychologists now understand that bonding doesn’t begin at birth, but is a continuum of physiological, psychological, and spiritual events which begin in utero and continue throughout the postnatal bonding period. When this natural evolution is interrupted by a postnatal separation from the biological mother, the resultant experience of abandonment and loss is indelibly imprinted upon the unconscious minds of these children, causing that which I call the “primal wound.” (Verrier, 1993, p. 1)

When the adoptee is separated from her birth mother, she undergoes extensive trauma. She will not remember this trauma, but it will stay in her subconscious as she lived it (Verrier, 1993). An event from a person’s infancy can and will stay with them through life. An example of the subconscious effect of an early experience would be Marc. Marc was in an orphanage for the first year of his life. Because of the lack of human touch, he would rock himself in his crib. Marc is now 42 years old and still rocks himself whenever he is watching television, listening to music, or sitting on a park bench. He does not remember rocking himself as an infant, but this practice has stayed with him through his subconscious his entire life.

The adoptee will always carry this issue of abandonment with her wherever she goes. It is no different from when a husband leaves a wife. She may remarry to a wonderful man, but will always wonder if her new husband is also going to leave her. She must work through the abandonment issue to regain trust. The abandonment issue has to be acknowledged, before it can be resolved.

Even if the “primal wound” as described above was not a factor in the adoptees’ emotional well being, the knowledge of abandonment will always be there. She may have been told she was “chosen” by the adoptive parents but it will not be long until she figures out she was abandoned by the first set of parents. Julie P. responded to a question on the Adoptees Internet Mailing List (an Internet support group that consists of approximately 1000 members) about the feeling of being adopted, “No, I am not depressed, miserable, angry, or negative...but I have always felt second best. Sure I was told that I was the (chosen) one, but first I was rejected.” Regardless of the circumstances, it will always feel like abandonment to her.

The adoptee is given very little information about her relinquishment. She is expected to leave the past behind and concentrate of her present and future. Out of respect for the adoptive parents, she will often not ask questions or talk about her adoption if it is an uncomfortable subject in her home. She will wonder about her relinquishment and her birth mother. To attempt to fill in the gaps she will create fantasies of acceptable scenarios of the circumstances of her conception, birth and relinquishment, that she can emotionally handle.

As a small child, she will not understand how a mother could give her up, or abandon her. Adoptees may feel they must have been a bad baby or that the birth mother was an uncaring person. Other thoughts will occur, such as she was stolen from the birth mother, either by public authorities or her adoptive parents. Often children will fluctuate in their thoughts and fantasies depending on their perception of the adoptive parents at any given time. (Lifton, 1988 &1994; Verrier, 1993; Brodzinsky, Schechter & Henig, 1992; Reitz & Watson, 1992; Adopting Resources, 1995) She will generally outgrow believing her fantasies and begin to see them as just that, but a part of her will always wonder.

The “chosen” child story also has negative affects on a child for other reasons. The child may feel that she has to be perfect to live up to her “chosen” status. Her role model adoptees include Superman and Jesus. This is a hard image for the average child to live up to. She may either become the compliant “perfect” child or she may act out and misbehave to test the commitment of the adoptive parents. Either way, often times she is not being herself, but rather acting a part. This acting can be very emotionally draining and confusing, and may last until the early adult years and beyond. When the adoptee can not live up to her perfect “chosen” status, it will contribute to the feeling of low self-esteem. This will be further exacerbated if the adoptive parents are not aware of the issue and their actions reinforce the adoptees beliefs, i.e., sending her away for residential treatment or openly wishing her to be more like themselves.

The adoptee is also aware of many ghosts that follow her through life. These ghosts include the person she would have been had she not been adopted, the ghost of the birth mother and birth father, and the ghost of the adoptive family’s child that would have been (Lifton, 1994, chap. 6). She may find herself trying to connect to her ghosts through her actions. Either being her image of her birth family, living her life according to her fantasy birth family, or acting as her vision of the adoptive parent’s natural child.

When the adolescent adoptee acts out it may be her way of trying to connect with the image she has of her birth mother or may be that she does not feel worthy of the adoptive parents love. Adolescence is a confusing time for any child, but the adoptee has many more identity issues to deal with. She may also be testing the commitment of the adoptive parents, seeing if they will send her away for being bad.

A great many of these young people are in serious trouble with the law and are drug addicted. The girls show an added history of nymphomania and out-of- wedlock pregnancy, almost as if they were acting out the role of the “whore” mother. In fact, both sexes are experimenting with a series of identities that seem to be related to their fantasies about the biological parents. (Lifton, 1988, p. 45)

As the adoptee begins to become aware of her adoptee status she will notice the differences she has from her peers and other family members. I noticed in my family that I did not have the nose or ears of any of my adoptive family. This is normal for an adoptee and can make her feel left out or misplaced in her family. A particularly tough time for the adoptee is when first learning about genetics in school. The first lesson in heredity and genetics usually is regarding eye color. If the adoptees’ own eyes do not fall into the proper genetic pattern she is left with a distinct feeling of not belonging. There are many instances in growing up when she is again faced with the knowledge that she is different; when asked about family history by a doctor, when asked if she has a sister because the inquirer knows someone who looks just like her, when asked about ethnic background, in regular day to day conversations.

Physical differences are not the only ones that are noticed. A difference in personality or talents may further misplace the adoptee from her family. In talking with other adoptees, I have described this feeling as “feeling like my adoptive family is in a big circle but I am on the outside looking in.”

With the adoptee not having a role model who resembles her physically or psychologically, it is more difficult to define where her life shall lead. She may come from a biologically artistic family, but adopted into a scientific family. She may not only feel the need to follow in her adoptive family’s footsteps, attending similar colleges, choosing similar careers, but she did not have the artistic role model to show her that way of life. This further complicates the identity formation of the adoptee. “One’s identity begins with the genes and family history...” (Reitz & Watson, 1992, p. 134)

Adoptees also lack the ability to see their physical characteristics as they will present themselves in the future. A natural born daughter would be able to tell how big she is going to be, if she will have a tendency to be overweight, or if she is going to go grey early in life, but the adoptee is denied this genetic role model and will not know these things until she reaches that stage in life herself. This adds to the curiosity of wanting to know their genetic background.

Rachel says that families are a hall of mirrors, “Everyone but adoptees can look in and see themselves reflected. I didn’t know what it was like to be me. I felt like someone who looks into a mirror and sees no reflection. I felt lonely, not connected to anything, floating, like a ghost.” (Lifton, 1994, p. 68)

The adoptee will feel even more dissociated when conversations regarding other family members or peers births are brought up. She is missing the story of her birth parents meeting, her conception, her birth, and in some instances, some time after her birth. On the Adoptees Internet Mailing List one member described this feeling as the “floating cosmic blip.” It is often commented that the adoptee feels hatched not born or that they are some type of space alien. Non-adoptees take their own life story for granted, but the adoptee is acutely aware that theirs is missing. So now, not only does the adoptee feel dissociated from her adoptive family, but also from her peers, for she is different.

Adoptees are faced with a feeling of loss and grief that they are not allowed, by society, to actively mourn. “With adoption, the child experiences a loss (like divorce or death) of an unknown person, and doesn’t know why.” (Adopting Resources, 1995) She is aware that family members are lost to her, but is expected to not mourn the loss of this family member she has never known. She will often be chastised when asking questions of her birth family from her adoptive family.

Not all of these issues affect adoptees to the same extent. Some may spend a lifetime dwelling on it, others may not even appear to notice. This would be true of any group of people that lived through trauma, such as Vietnam War Veterans. It should be noted that adoptees are over represented in residential treatment centers.

The number of Adoptees in the adolescent and young-adult clinics and residential treatment centers is strikingly high. Doctors from the Yale Psychiatric Institute and other hospitals that take very sick adolescents have told me they are discovering that from one-quarter to one-third of the patients are adopted. (Lifton, 1988, p.45)

In recent years there have been more works written on the subject. In 1978 Sorosky, Baran, and Pannor wrote the Adoption Triangle. This was one of the first written books that spoke specifically of the psychological issues of adoption. In one reference book written for psychologist by Reitz and Watson (1992) it was noted:

Despite the proliferation in recent decades of the literature on both family therapy and adoption, there has been little focus on the treatment of families involved in adoption. We offer our approach both as one sample of the current state of the practice art and as a way to generate hypotheses. Little, definitive, formal research findings are available, we have cited them; we believe, however, that findings from practice are valid field research. The clinician’s skills in observing recurrent themes and patterns resemble those of the formal researcher who looks for patterns in statistical data. Both clinicians and researchers must then interpret their findings. (preface)

In the early 1960s Dr. Marshall Schechter, child psychiatrist, was challenged by social workers when he first made the observation that there were a disproportionate number of adoptees in his clinic ( as cited in Lifton, 1988, p. 44). He later teamed up with Brodzinsky to research the psychology of adoption and to write various books (1990, 1992) on the subject.

There are many books written by members of the triad (refers to the three sides in adoption; adoptive parents, birth parents, and adoptees) that are geared toward their triad peers. (Lifton, 1988 and 1994; Verrier, 1993). These are an excellent resource for triad members to begin to explore the issues of adoption. Although they are not written with psychologists in mind, they would be a good first step for mental health professionals to begin to also understand adoption.

In researching basic child psychology books, if adoption is mentioned, it is in the following context: “It should be obvious that neither I or anybody else knows enough about the psychology of adoption to offer any firm advice.” (Church, 1973)

Although there are both more studies and writings on the subject, mental health professionals remain ignorant of adoptees’ issues. Thomas Danner, PhD, a local family counselor, discussed some of his educational experiences and views on adoptees issues (personal communication, May 17, 1996). He stated he had not given the adoptees issues any prior thought. When presented with some of the repercussions of adoption, he was in agreement that these things could play into the emotional well being of the adoptee. He was open in disclosing that he had little knowledge of adoption issues and was willing to accept the ideas this paper has to present.

Betty Jean Lifton, PhD, Adoption Counselor/Author and adoptee, also commented on the subject (personal communication, May 20, 1996). When asked what lead to her studying adoption issues. Her reply was: ‘Are you an adoptee...then you know.’ This illustrates how most of the research done on adoption issues has been raised by someone who has been touched by adoption. It is easy to understand how someone who has not lived it, would not give the subject much thought. Mental health professionals need to be made to give the subject some thought or they will be doing a disservice to their adopted patients.

The first step to communicating the psychological effects of adoption to mental health professionals is to educate the public in general. There have been more recent books, movies, and such on adoption but they fail to acknowledge the special issues. Through accurate media representation, the general population can receive information needed to better understand the adopted person. In turn, the mental health professionals can begin to study the subject and explore alternate treatments for their adopted patients.

College and university professors need to begin teaching the special issues and treatments unique to adoption, just has they teach unique approaches to dealing with sexual abuse, divorce of parents, Attention Deficit Disorder, and the many other problems youth are faced with today. The subject must also be included in the college text books or the students must utilize the reference books written on adoption (Reitz & Watson, 1992; Brodzinsky & Schechter, 1990).

Adoptive parents must also be aware of these special issues so they can find a counselor who is trained to deal with them. Too often, counselors of adopted children are not aware that special issues exist and they attempt to treat the least disturbing problem and thus they fail to get to the core issue of adoption. Parents who called me have taken their child--usually an adolescent adopted at birth--from therapist to therapist, without ever having come upon one who is knowledgeable about adoption. The child now has become what Kirschner calls a “secondhand patient.” Therapists who do not see adoption as a core issue cannot reach the child. The Adoptee remains isolated and continues to act out... (Lifton, 1988, p. 273)

After realizing all the different issues adoption holds for their daughter, Mr. and Mrs. Smith received a referral for an adoption specialist in their area. They are now attending family counseling and making some progress toward their daughter’s recovery through open communication and understanding of the trauma she still experiences.

Family History, Forever Hidden

Family history, forever hidden: Adoptee seeks clues

by: JACLYN COSGROVE World Staff Writer
7/6/2007 12:00 AM

One of the men who was prominent in Oklahoma's move toward statehood decided after retiring from his work as a politician to adopt a baby girl in 1926.

Bird S. McGuire, one of the first Oklahoma congressmen, and wife Goldie traveled to Kansas City, Mo., in early 1927 to pick up their new daughter, Marie Amundson.

The McGuires then took their daughter on a train back to Tulsa.

And now 80 years later, with both of her adoptive parents having died, Kathleen Grove, once known as Marie Amundson, has begun to ask questions about her history.

"If the family that's left doesn't want to talk to me, that's fine," Grove said. "I would just like a little health history."

Grove, 80, experiences vertigo at least twice a day.

Even after she endured several hours of testing, doctors aren't sure what is causing the problem.

Grove said she would like to know her biological parents' medical history and ask living relatives questions to determine what might be causing the vertigo.

She also could tell her two sons, six grandchildren and five great-grandchildren what to expect as they get older.

However, Grove has run into a problem.

"If your parents are dead and there's no one to OK it, you can't see" records, Grove said.

Because Grove was adopted in Jackson County, Mo., she must follow Missouri state laws for obtaining adoption records.

Missouri statutes define what information may be released from a closed adoption record and under what circumstances, according to the Missouri Family Court division.

When the law allows, the family court division of the Circuit Court of Jackson County, Mo., provides a person known as a confidential intermediary as a means of contact between adult adoptees and birth parents.

Sandra Sperrazza, of Edina, Minn., has worked as a confidential intermediary for Missouri for the past 10 years.

Sperrazza said she charges $300 for her services.

She contacts the adoptee's mother, if alive, and other family members.

Sperrazza is unable to disclose to anyone other than the adoptee's mother the identity of the person she is helping.

Sperrazza tells the adoptee's family member that she is helping a friend with geneology and needs some medical history.

She said people are usually forthcoming with the information.

However, Grove's biological mother is probably dead.

If her mother is deceased, under current Missouri law, Grove will never have access to her mother's name.

"She could apply for a court order, but I don't know if a judge would ever grant it," Sperrazza said.

Grove said along with medical history she would like to know her biological parents' country of origin.

Through nonidentifying information obtained with the help of Linda Colvard, a local woman who helps adoptees find birth records, she knows her birth parents' last name is either Amundson or Amundsen.

Grove said she thinks her mother's name was Bernice Amundson, with a questionable spelling on the last name, but she has no way of confirming that.

Linda Colvard of Tulsa, who has worked for the past eight years with adoptees looking to obtain adoption records, has been helping Grove in her search to find out her history.

Among all the people she's helped, Colvard said Grove has one of the more difficult cases because of the laws in Jackson County, Mo.

"I'm not ever going to give up," Colvard said. "Anybody who's 50 to 80 years old -- for them not to have the right to their own records -- I just don't understand people's thinking on that. They simply want to know the truth to their birth."

Colvard said she contacted Republican Sen. Jim Inhofe's office in May in hopes that he could help her receive a waiver for the Missouri law that prohibits Grove from being able to obtain her mother's name.

Colvard said she was told about a week ago that one of Inhofe's assistants in Washington is working on Grove's case, but Colvard hasn't been updated recently on the status.

Meanwhile, through all the phone calls, the letters, the e-mails, Grove waits.

But for Grove, time could be running out.

Grove doesn't know the cause of her illness and therefore isn't sure how it will affect how much time she has left.

Grove said the struggle to obtain her adoption records has been maddening.

"This woman I talked to in Kansas City, she said, 'It's just the way the law is,' " Grove said.

Colvard said she believes most adoptees attempting to obtain records are treated like "second-class citizens" unable to obtain their medical history.

"I truly believe their civil rights are being trampled," Colvard said. "Anybody has the right to know where they came from."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jaclyn Cosgrove 581-8300
jaclyn.cosgrove@tulsaworld.com

Happy Easter 2012

© Photographer: Tomo Jesenicnik | Agency: Dreamstime.com

This short devotional by Mark Brazee says that Jesus went to the cross on the day Passover was celebrated (when the blood on their doorposts kept them alive).
He died "in the evening" when the lambs were slain, as a sign that He truly is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world.

Passover was "the 14th day of the first month". As I read this I was reminded that Andrew (our one pound miracle baby, now 7 years old and loves lambs) was born on Jan. 14th at 8:41pm. His actual due date was April 8th ~ Easter this year.

I was, once again, overwhelmed with emotion. Thank you, Lord, for speaking through every last detail of our lives. For showing me that You died, so that we could live. Help me to listen and never give up.

This is also the 5th anniversary of when I started this blog.

Thank you, God, for never giving up on me, and answering my hearts cry to teach me to trust You, even through my many shortcomings & weaknesses.

Behold the Lamb of God

The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world. —John 1:29


When God gave the instructions for the Passover, He gave very specific instructions about the lamb: Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male of the first year: ye shall take it out from the sheep, or from the goats: and ye shall keep it up until the fourteenth day of the same month: and the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it in the evening. (Ex. 12:5,6). Jesus fit every one of these qualifications. He was a Lamb without blemish for He’d never sinned. He was the firstborn in his family, “a male of the first year.” There was even a particular time this Lamb had to die: “in the evening.”

The very hour Jesus died on the Cross was the time when Passover lambs were sacrificed. Who killed the Passover lamb? “The whole assembly of the congregation of Israel.” In Acts 2:23, Peter preached to the Jewish multitude about who was responsible for Jesus’ death: “Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain.” Jesus was condemned by the Romans and crucified by Israel, but He laid His life down willingly for you and me. He took our sin and our sickness upon Himself. He knew it was the only way you and I could be delivered from the bondage of sin and sickness.

Confession: Jesus was the Lamb slain to take away the sin of the whole world. Yet, Jesus died for me. Through Him I receive all the benefits salvation includes. I’m saved, healed, and delivered!

Digging Up Hopeful Good Shepherds Who Will Restore

This article is so encouraging...my adoptive family actually comes from a long line of "Shepards", as that was their last name.  God is teaching me that He has always been our "Good Shepherd" and will take care of us.  We are His.  He loves us! 

Bob Hartley: Digging Up Hopeful Good Shepherds Who Will Restore the Hope of Our Calling