James M. Beidler, a freelance writer and lecturer on genealogy discusses in a recent column, Should we call it "genealogy" or "family history"? the adoptees' in their "forever families."
He points out that traditionally, genealogy is the study of bloodlines, and this excludes adoptees. So much for "as if" born to...and is there any wonder why family tree garde school projects cause adoptees stress?
Beidler, suggests: And, in these days of "open" adoption as well as more reunions
with birthparents, it makes sense to me that adoptees "belong" in both families, one by blood, the other by physical bonding.
Note, belong in quotes, and physical bonding? Gawd, I hope not! Does he really mean physical as opposed to blood related? And this guy is a writer and a genealogist?
He goes on to discuss DNA testing that eliminates people who thought they were part of a family and concludes:
"No one should have to choose one or another family when he or she can be part of both."
Gee, what a novel thought!
Beidler is a freelance writer and lecturer on genealogy. Contact him
either at Box 270, Lebanon, PA 17042, or by e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org.