Yesterday I posted Adoption Truth Subverted AGAIN.
I was angry and shared my frustration at having spent the previous week researching studies on suicide and adoption in the wake of the most recently widely publicized suicide death of Marie Osmond's son. It ws upsetting to note that such research has been being conducted back to the 1990s and poo-pooed and ignored. I tied that into to the story of Samoan adoptions being likewise silenced.
I then sent a link my post to a list of adoption professionals I am on and got some very angry feedback. I was told that I was obviously "upset about something that happened in [my] situation" and there are "certainly cases where people were forced to place a child for adoption or were tricked into it, but [I] need to stop besmirching all adoptions!"
This was followed by a lecturetelling me that MOST adoptions are "successful", his adoptions were wonderful, and a lesson on the many reasons some mothers need to place children by someone who subsequently identifies as "director of an adoption exchange, where we essentially only deal with kids with special needs whose parents are not able or willing to parent them" which is a horse of a whole different color.
Another on the list defended telling me that some mothers who lost children to adoption found it to be a "benefit" and that it brought them "happiness." Now you can tell me that some mothers are "content" with their decisions, but...
I asked her if she would tell anyone who had lost a loved one to death that death brought some a benefit and happiness? In fact someone ready to file for divorce might welcome the death of their spouse as a joyous occasion to celebrate, but you would not say that to another grieving widow, would you? In a private email, I told her I was hurt and offended but instead of an apology to hurting my feelings, I was told to stop "ranting."
I was at my wits end, upset and nearly in tears...feeling attacked by both of these folk...when a light bulb dawned and I realized that both of the upset parties were people whose incomes depended - directly or indirectly upon on the continued flow of adoptions.
The IRONY of these replies coming immediately following my posting:
"telling the truth about adoption is bad for business. It's like being a whistle blower in the pharmaceutical industry."
It's like saying the emperor has no clothes! As for the fact that MOST adoptions are "successful"... does that mean children should not be taught how to protect themselves from strangers who might abduct them, since MOST children are never abducted? Should we not teach fire and drowning safety rules since most homes do not burn down and most people do not drown?
Speaking out against doption atrocities in an effort to curtail them is not for sissies! It's often pretty thankless and tiresome. I take my lunps and keep on going...
And then...a stranger on the list ttoally defended me!