Wednesday, May 2, 2012

Random Thoughts: Adoption and Anger....

Random Thought Number One: On Anger

I've been wonder why anger - in and of itself - is seen as a bad thing. A negative. A criticism for everything one with passion says. Anger out in violent ays, yes. That's not nice at all and should be squashed.

Also anger held in, denied, can cause many issues for oneself and for others.

I was angry with my friend I told my wrath, my wrath did end.
I was angry with my foe; I told it not, my wrath did grow.
—William Blake


Someone also said: "Speak when you are angry and you will make the best speech you will ever regret."

But anger that is expressed in intelligent discourse and or motivates? What's wrong with that? It's actually the goal of anger management classes.

Does anyone criticize the mothers of MADD for using their righteous mother lion anger at their kids' senseless deaths to empower them into trying to spare other kid's lives???

Why then should those of us hurt by adoption not channel our anger to saving others our hurt? Why are we too often dismissed as angry and bitter as if:
1) we have no right to be, and
2) that makes everything we say untrue or less valuable or significant?  Why?
"....the red-hot emotion has a positive side, say psychologists who study anger. In studies and in clinical work, they find anger can help clarify relationship problems, clinch business deals, fuel political agendas and give people a sense of control during uncertain times. More globally, they note, it can spur an entire culture to change for the better, as witnessed by the civil rights movement of the 1960s and the earlier women's suffrage movement.
"Imagine what the women's suffrage movement would have been like if women had said, 'Guys, it's really so unfair, we're nice people and we're human beings too. Won't you listen to us and give us the vote?" says social psychologist Carol Tavris, PhD, author of "Anger: The Misunderstood Emotion" (Simon & Schuster, 1989). "To paraphrase Malcolm X, there's a time and a place for anger, where nothing else will do."  When Anger's a Plus
Of course, note that I did say anger expressed intelligently. Cursing and ranting and raving do not win points, and certainly do not educate anyone.  When you feel like you want to strangle someone - take lots of deep breaths. DO NOT HIT SEND whether in email or a blog comment.  Instead, open a word file and begin to compose your reply. Then edit it. Remove all insults and attacks.  Reread and edit again before sending or posting.  When I am REALLY, REALLY pissed, and/or it's a close friend or family, I wait a day to a week and reading it yet again before sending. You will discover how much more effective your anger can be when it is tamed in this way!

Also, re-read the email or post you are replying to. If you are like me, I find that when I am pissed, I mis-read!  I too easily can skip a "not" that is vital, or basically misinterpret a lot.  re-reading when you have a cooling off period can be very enlightening. Too bad far too many "conversations" on the net are rapid fire.

If you follow this method and are STILL called angry or bitter, in a dismissing way, then stand your ground and say: Yes I am and I have every right to be! And my righteous indignation does not detract in any way from the facts I am presenting or the points I am making.

Random Thought Number Two: The "Better" Life 


Recently I've encountered the joyful, happy adoptee - more insidious to me than an angry one, any day!

Their rhetoric goes like this: "I'm glad I was adopted. My life is so much better than it might have been."  Yes, you've been told that, it's been ingrained into your brain since you were a tiny tot and told that you were rescued, saved and chosen!  But do you ACTUALLY know for a fact what the truth is?

Have you met your mother and father? Siblings? Do you know if anyone ever abused or neglected you or if your mother was just deemed "too young" to even TRY to be a mother? Was she pressured, coerced, forced to relinquish? Did she marry? Is she a career woman? A professional? School teacher, mother, nurse? Is she  a good, worthwhile human being?  Could she have been any of this had she not suffered the trauma of carrying a child and loosing it?

Amazingly, the vast majority of happy, joyful, glad-to-have-been-adopted have never met their mothers because they "don't need to" and yet they make all kinds of assumptions that confirm how much better off they are and how grateful to have been adopted.

Others look at the financial aspect, how many more material "advantages" or a better education adoption provided them with. One argued that she knew for a fact her mother as poor. So i asked would it not have bene better than for someone to have helped her so she could have kept you? maybe given her a job with day care? Helped her find affordable housing?

Recently an "anony" MOUSE commented on an old blog post saying this:
I'm a victim of "family preservation", I would have given anything to have grown up with a family that wanted me, and because everyone was so scared to violate THEIR rights or preferences, I'll be dealing with the emotional fallout for the rest of my life. I would have rather lived in a cardboard box with strangers that wanted me rather than been forced to stay with "parents" that didn't. 
My reply:
You are only a victim if that is how you CHOOSE to see yourself! You are also the capability of being a survivor! 
Look, NO ONE gets to choose their parents (with very rare exception) - not the parents we are born to or those who raise us. It's ALL a crap shoot! A spin of the wheel of fortune. AND, there are good and bad natural parents, good and bad foster parents, and good and bad adoptive parents. 
Adoption does not - by any means - guarantee a better life. It only guarantees a different life!  
AND, no matter how good and loving one's adoptive parents are, adoptees still have to deal with feelings of having been rejected or abandoned, and they have to deal with lack of being treated equally as compared to non-adopted folk in regards to access to their own birth certificate and thus their medical history.  
So, at best, it's a trade-off and not equal trade. You MAY gain in the bargain, but you are guaranteed to loose your medical history and your equality. 
Adoption: You may gain in a re shuffle of the cards you had no control over or choice in to begin with, but you are guaranteed to loose your identity, your medical history and your equality....as well as your kin, your heritage and in some cases your culture and language.

Not exactly a win-win. Very much a win-loose, at best.

And those are my random thoughts for today...Watch this space for updates.

#3: Bio

The term "bio" is very offensive to most mothers. We are mothers who lost children to adoption or others who relinquished. natural, real, first, and original mother is also acceptable. But please refrain from using "bio" - it is so very cold and clinical. ALL of my children were born to me. Flesh of my flesh. They are my children. NONE are my "bio" children.

Conversely, we are ALL biological creatures. Unless anyone has a robot for a mother or a child! :-)

Bio is a science class or a brief biography.

#4. On the Utter Randomness of Adoption


So many adoptions occur because people are made to believe that adoption offers a child a "better" life.

Truth is that all adoption is a random reshuffling of the hand you are dealt. It's a spin of the wheel of fortune, a toss of the dice. A crap shoot! And it's totally random as to who is next up at bat and gets your kid.

Choosing photos and a bio (ah, see, that's where that word belongs!) guarantee absolutely NOTHING! As Doctor Gregory House is fond of saying: People lie! people especially lie when they want something and they likewise may want to hide some things, like even their true identity or location.

They may be good people they may not. They may stay married, they may not. You may get married, finnish college and wind up better off than them!  You may marry your child's father and have his or her full siblings. You may never be able to have any other children and thus have given away the only child you'll ever have - that was not something you were prepared for, huh?

Mother I have known PERSONALLY have found their kids, living in a car; abandoned at boarding school; deceased since they were infants, toddler or as teens or young adults...beaten, battered, sexually abused, emotionally abused,

Adoption provides NO guarantees. the only way to guarantee who your child is raised is to do it yourself!

29 comments:

Fred said...

It seems to me that you have invalidated the thoughts, feelings, and opinions of other "happy" adoptees to push your own perspective. How are you then not guilty of a variation of the very thing you are so vehemently against?

You are right that adoption, and especially international adoption, is fraught with many flaws--so many, one could easily and legitimately argue they outweigh any possible benefits that might accrue to the child.

But to invalidate the legitimacy of other adoptees' opinions just to get your own point across? You're over the line.

You have one perspective and are in a single situation. Sure, there is objective truth to be found, and maybe yours has elements of it. But don't presume to advocate for all adoptees and then bash people from the very group you are advocating to protect. Just because someone has a feeling/opinion about their family that is contrary to yours, doesn't make them wrong.

You should know that I agree with much of the sentiment of what you have written here, particularly surrounding the entitlement mentality of adoptive parents, the ignorance of the loss the child and family experience, etc. But I simply cannot agree with your invalidation of other adoptees.

Mirah Riben said...

Well, Fred, I disagree. i mean i see your point and even understand how you might conclude that. but I am not DISMISSING happy adoptees.

I have in no way suggested they have no right to their happiness or should not be happy, or should be angry instead, or have nay other feeling as people do when they tell "angry adoptees" they should be grateful instead.

I am merely pointing out that many that I have encountered who claim they are better off do not know that for a fact.

And BTW, I am not adopted.

Jodi said...

Fred, MR's blog came out of a situation posted elsewhere. Our adoption group admins got called out as angry by an adoptee. Our adoption group does post both good and bad issues with adoption. There just happens to be more bad than good points in adoption. many in our group happen to have experienced the dark side of adoption. If someone is looking for only "Happy Adoptions Stories" to be posted in our group than are group is not for them.

This adoptee seems to be fine being adopted and claims to have no interest in finding her bio parents. MR's view is this adoptee made assumptions about their bio parents but claims to have no interest in finding them. How can one make assumptions about the circumstances that led to their adoption unless they see all sides. I have no issues with a person who is happy with their adoption but to make assumptions about your bio parents is wrong if you don't want to seek the truth.

Also in this same thread Our group got attacked by an "Entitled AP" who adopted internationally saving the poor orphans of China. Called our group a bunch of Idiots and also attacked me personally about me being adopted for no reason other than I dont agree with this person. Yes I am guilty of firing back but I meant what I said, As an adoptee I am sick and tired of people attacking me in general for being an ungrateful angry adoptee. These are one sided people who see the AP's entitled viewpoint or the happy adoptee that does not want to hear the dark side of adoption

Fred, to understand MR's blog you have to understand that in general some people who come in our group come in one sided and only their side counts. They already know that our group admins have experienced the dark side of adoption. So why do they come in our group if they chose to ignore the negative side and seem to want us not to post the negative side? Seems to me like they are seeking attention or they just like to troll or what I refer to as board bullies who just like to start trouble.

Mirah Riben said...

What Jodi is calling an "adoption group" is a Facebook Page called adoption News & Events. Some, but not all of the people I described herein commented there. Some elsewhere, on blogs, etc. What I wrote here is self-contained and needs no outside reading to understand. Where people posted is not the point at all. It is the gist of what they are expressing.

Jodi said...

MR I agree with you but I think that specific thread was the "Icing on the Cake" and triggered this blog. I know it got me fired up. The specific adoptte in the thread on Adoption News an Events was not understanding your view and it seems Fred may have taken your view about "Happy Adoptee" the wrong way as if you weren't happy for them. This is why I stated the "Happy Adoptee" is not the issue, it is the happy adoptee who wants to assume their bio parents reasons for giving them up, thinks the worst, but does not wish to seek the truth when the truth could be so far off from what they think. One cant assume about their adoption if they are unwilling or have no interest in seeking truth.

You see it as there is a good chance if an adoptee seeks the truth their bio mother may have been coerced like you were into giving their child away. Many bio mothers had this experience. I fully understand why you would want to encourage adoptees to seek out the truth. I so wish this is what happened to me, but it didn't. People have to seek when and if they are ready. Some may be afraid of the truth and may not want to know in fear of rejection. You know some bio mothers do turn their children away if they are found. Going through rejection twice can be very hard to deal with.I always tell people if they decide to search, look for answers and truth not relationships. If you get the truth, answers and relationships you get an added bonus.

Mirah Riben said...

"One cant assume about their adoption if they are unwilling or have no interest in seeking truth."

Yes! Well said.

I don't encourage anyone to do anything they are not ready to do and I am well aware that fear of rejection - and also fear of hurting one's adoptive parents - are powerful forces. And, yes some adoptees - and some mothers - are rejected. That is why it is a very personal choice. Saying what you stated above, paraphrasing my blog post quite succinctly -- not assuming what you don;t know -- does not necessarily mean that anyone has to search. They simply should refrain, however, from making assumptions about the unknown. However, many are basing these assumptions on what they've been told and believe to be true.

Many adoptees do not know how much adoption agencies and sometimes their parents can lie or bend the truth or simply make up convenient stories about their original family.

And Jodi. one more thing. The term "bio" is very offensive to most mothers. We are mothers who lost children to adoption or others who relinquished. natural, real, first, and original mother is also acceptable. But please refrain from using "bio" - it is so very cold and clinical. ALL of my children were born to me. Flesh of my flesh. They are my children. NONE are my "bio" children. Conversely, we are ALL biological creatures. unless anyone has a robot for a mother or a child! Think I'll add that to my random thoughts!

Jodi said...

Im not saying you encourage when a person is not ready to search but I think the "Happy Adoptee" in that thread took you response to her posts that way.

Yes there are some AP's that will tell stories/lies to the children they adopt or they have been given false info from agency or attorney involved in the adoption. The "Happy Adoptee" did not state what her AP's told her. She came into the tread stating she had a Happy Adoption but did not discus the circumstances she was told about her adoption by AP's. Was she told or given false info? Sounds to me like this person does have some doubt about their Happy Adoption or they wouldn't be posting, they would just read our posts and move on.

I don't mean to offend anyone by using the term Bio.Biology is natural, It's DNA. My DNA states the woman who gave birth to me is my biological mother. The person who gave birth to me. I would not call her my "Real" mother. She herself committed fraud in my adoption. She gave me up voluntarily and created me to trap a man and her plan backfired. Once a child is adopted, paper states AP's are an adoptees "Real" parents. We know this is not true and not reality so I dont like the term "Real" . Real could pertain to Ap's.

Mirah Riben said...

Adoption language is controversial, hotly debated, and in constant flux.

The term "real' is one that is very contentious, I know. I simply added it to a list of words that mothers who lost children to adoption would be perfectly comfortable hearing. APS, on the other hand find it offensive. So I rarely use it, except when I am intentionally trying to piss off an AP who has been exceptionally rude or dense and totally ignore their child's heritage, or come across with a great deal of arrogant entitlement.

I support each person's right to address their family members as they chose. Whatever you and your mother are mutually comfortable with and agree upon is fine, as I is with any other mother and child - adopted, step or whatever.

What I am telling you Jodi is this: The term you have used here is OFFENSIVE to MANY within the active adoption reform community. If you persist in using in your online comments you will get told this repeatedly and many will be less polite about than i am. Some get furiously angry at the use o that words or the birth word as a prefix.

You can either choose to be respectful of others' feelings when posting, or offend and insult others and deal with the consequences.

I was politely cluing you in. It may not offend you or your mothers, but is IS very offensive to MANY! I am surprised no one has ever told you that before.

Jodi said...

Again I am not trying to offend anyone. Personally, I have never been attacked for using the term "Bio" and I use it often. Being that I am an adoptee when I speak about adoption I must speak about two different families when addressing my points of view as an adoptee. I don't have an agreement with the woman who gave birth to me to call her anything. I do not speak to her or want a relationship with her but I do speak to some of by biological family. Aunts, Uncles, Cousins and sibling. When speaking about by blood line relatives I always use the term 'Bio". They are my biological family and none of them gave birth to me. The woman who gave birth to me is my biological link to my biological relatives that I do speak to. I dont address them as my 'Natural" family. People in the DNA world of DNA testing will use the term "Bio" and not use the term Natural. Many adoptees DNA test.They have to to find answers if their adoptions are sealed and they want answers.

In my situation my bio mother is nothing more than a baby making dumping machine.Calling her this is much more harsh than bio yet it is the truth. Im not the only child she created to trap a man. She dumped that child off too and took no responsibility for the children she created. This goes for my bio grandmother too. She had 9 babies by 5 different men. 2 of them she left with social services. One being my bio mother. Both adopted and grandma does not acknowledge the children she gave up for adoption even exist. I speak to Grandma's siblings and they claim there maybe more children she dumped off like garbage with fake names and info like she did my bio mother. Unfortunately the women in my family are not like you and some of the other wonderful birth mothers that post in AN & E. The wonderful mothers that were coerced and suffered from the heartache of loosing the children they gave birth to.

I can understand my bio mother had her own issues with being adopted, I could understand my bio mother wanting to trap a man to get out of her AP's house at a very early age. She was adopted by a racist and my bio mother is not white but was passed off as white. What I can't understand is why she kept creating babies (I was the 2nd. first baby she had at age 14) thinking the men would want to keep her. She already knew what adoption trauma did to her but she put herself in a situation to keep getting pregnant with children she could not take care of and put me in the same situation she was born to. She then sent me off with a pack of lies. Lies my bio grandmother sent her off with and on top of it my bio mother created more lies. My adoption attorney also added lies to my adoption papers. She still tells lies that I can prove in court records to be false. My bio mother and grandmother are selfish. They were only thinking of themselves and not the children they brought into this world and dumped off.

I needed and chose to look for the truth. The truth isn't always pretty. Mine is no doubt ugly and uglier than I could have imagined. I am thankful that through all this mess I was able to get some truth through my bio family and get through two sealed adoptions when many adoptees cant get through their own adoptions. I am thankful that some of my bio family acknowledges that I do exist and have welcomed me as part of my bio family tree where I feel I belong. You know many adoptees feel the need to belong when they have been displaced either by stranger adoption, culture or race indifference to their Ap's. Birth mothers/parents and or Ap's who have not been adopted already belong to their bio family at birth. As the adoptee we are the ones who suffer loosing bio ties to blood line family.

Stephanie said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jodi said...

Any woman that gives birth is 1/2 that child's biological DNA link to their biological family tree. To me the term "Bio" is acknowledging the birth mother exists. That the bio mother gave birth to that child and the child is 1/2 of all that birth mothers relatives per DNA. Bio is genetic ties to ones blood line family. You know there are AP's that do not acknowledge their adoptive children have bio families. To some "entitled Ap's" they are the only family an adoptee has. The adoptee should be grateful they were "saved" and that adoptee should only acknowledge adoptive family and not their blood line biological ties that were genetically passed down from their bio family. Our bio family is not just made up through mother and father. Why is it ok to call your father your biological father and can not call your mother your biological mother? The only difference between biological father or mother is that the mother gives birth but both create 1/2 that child's biology.

Stephanie said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mirah Riben said...

Jodi,

You say "my bio mother is nothing more than a baby making dumping machine" and that is your personal business between you and her and makes anything you call or hr or not your business. As I said, I respect anyone's personal right to personal language.

Thus, there is not need to continue defending. I am telling - even if you not experienced it YET - that many mothers feel that being called a bio or biological - or even birth - mother, puts them in the exact same category as your mother. it makes them feel like they are being called "baby making dumping machines" when they in fact are far from that! they want that distinction made! Some mothers and father deserve no respect. others are loving and caring and do not deserve to be maligned with language that THEY find hurtful.

Look, I am personally ok with the term birth mother. i feel it very well describes y relationship to my first daughter, Alicia, who was lost to adoption, may she rest in peace. But I am also very cognizant of others who have spoken out loud and clear and said that therm is offensive to them. I thus AVOID using it public writings.

It is just like people with intellectual disabilities prefer and ask NOT to be called retarded. It's like Black or African Americans choosing which of those THEY personally prefer - listening to them - and RESPECTING that!! It's about respect and not offending. You were not aware, now you are. Period.

Check the Origins-USA website for language.

Mirah Riben said...

Jodi - Below are TWO articles you can read. Again, I don't make this stuff up, I just report it. And I do not argue with people's feelings, I simply try to respect them:

http://voices.yahoo.com/respectful-adoption-language-2139.html

http://www.firstmotherforum.com/p/positive-adoption-language.html

Robin said...

I am glad you brought this issue up about adoption and anger. I am involved in other reform areas and there is no where else that is as contentious as adoption. Adoption is in most cases a tragedy Whatever the reason, it is a terrible breakdown of a family. Most mothers want to keep their children and most children don't want to be given up.

The bottom line is we do not recognize the sacred bond between a mother and her child in U.S. culture. Whether it is slut shaming to get a woman to give up her child or convincing her of some supposedly 'better' life that a more affluent person can offer Americans demonstrate that we do not value the biological bond. If we did we would do everthing possible to keep the mother and child together.

Jodi said...

MR, I understand that some might find the term "Bio" being offensive but me as the adopted child sees is this as an "Entitlement" issue on behalf of the woman who gave birth to me. Natural mothers need to see how the adopted child views the issue. Every person is biologically created through a woman's egg and man's sperm. Each person is biologically 1/2 of their parents and so on. If we call a man who's sperm created 1/2 of us a sperm donor or biological father it is ok. If I call the woman who's egg created us an egg donor when addressing natural conception or calling her biological it becomes offensive. This is hypocritical.

The woman who gave birth to me felt "Entitled" to own me why because she carried me in her womb for 9 months and gave birth to me even though my biology is 1/2 of her and 1/2 my father. My father wanted me per family but was "Not Entitled" to me because he didn't want my birth mother and society says I belong only to the woman to carried me and gave birth to me when it comes to adoption. My father does not count. In general Fathers don't count when a child is given up for adoption if the 2 parties that created the child are not married their biological ties to the child are not recognized by a court of law. Aren't we fighting for what is in the best interest of the child when it comes to adoption? My biological father should be just as "Entitled" to have raised me as my biological mother. He was not unfit. Had a good job, ect.They both contributed equal shares to create me and I should have ad the adopted child had the right to be with my father since my mother was unfit to raise me. There are many women out there who have given their children away with out notifying the biological father. This is "Entitlement" and not fair to the child.

Mirah Riben said...

JODI,

What you are not getting is that this is NOT about YOU and your mother. I have said more than once, call her whatever yo like. I have no objection.

I am really, really sorry that you cannot understand and ACCEPT that it IS offensive to some, even tho YOU yourself are with it!!

"Natural mothers need to see how the adopted child views the issue. " Really? How about YOU trying to understand and RESPECT how the majority of mothers who are active in adoption reform feel???

Have you even read either of the articles I shared links with before coming back and posting more of the same...???

Please read them! Also please check our origins-USA an org which represents mother who have lost children to adoption and see what they say is the preferred usage. Would you disrespect someone's preference to be called African American instead of B;lack or vice versa? Why can't you accept what i - and others (per the articles) are telling you instead of arguing about it, Jodi??

You are reminding me of the people YOU spoke of who don't listen or read anything you share but just keep going on and on repeating their same mistaken beliefs over and over...

Jodi said...

MR I am reading but feel like your not listening to my point of view and feel like I have to repeat myself. Its not just about me, I was also making general statements about how humans are created. Some info can pertain to a person adopted or not. Since this is a discussion about adoption, Any child who is adopted should be "Entitled" to have the chance to grow up with bio parents and or bio family before they are permitted to be adopted by strangers. Bio family should be "Entitled" to raise that child before giving that child to strangers.Bio family meaning anyone from mother, father, aunts, uncles, cousins, Grandparents. It is much easier to type the term bio family as a general than address each person by relationship in a family in a general conversation. People who are offend by the term biological need to look up the meaning of biology. Biology/biological is natural science and can be used as an alternative to natural.

Jodi said...

The yahoo article you posted-- Birth and Biological terms degrade the child's "True" family. What is that?? As an adoptee I find the term 'True family" offensive. Furthermore this article addresses how the child's family feels about "True family" not the child.

Mirah Riben said...

Jodi - it's a mutual problem. i feel you are not hearing me. I am not ignorant. I understand biology, genetics and DNA! I do not need a science lesson.

I am talking about people's FEELINGS, their sensitivities and their PREFERENCES.

You do not need to prove that the word you use is technically accurate. I get that, Jodi. But people find it offensive. Why can't YOU get THAT?!

Mothers who loving sacrifice or have their children stolen or are duped, or coerced or pressured or forced...do NOT want to be defined by a term that IS used to define sperm donors and "baby-making dumpers"!!! We are MORE than that! We think of our children as our children and we think of ourselves as their MOTHERS with NO PREFIX!!!

yes, adoptees and other writing about these complicated situations need to invent and create language to clarify who is who. But we can still try to be kind when we do so. If I am to be distinguished, then I am a "mother who lost a child to adoption." If that's too hard for you to write, I further suggested first or original mother as acceptable by all. Please don;t continue to INSULT ME and others for your convenience!

Carlynne Hershberger, CPSA said...

Jodi, I am a natural mother who lost a child to adoption. We're coming from different places in our perspective. You have the right to refer to your mother in any way you see fit - either of them. This discussion regarding terms seems to be ongoing and can get quite emotional. I recently had an adoptive mom correct me when I called myself a natural mother to the daughter I lost to adoption and she promptly said - "biological mother please". I had to remind her that I get to decide what name I am called. No one else gets to decide that. Calling myself the natural mother does not in any way infer that her other mother is unnatural.

It may be a fact that we are biologically connected and it seems as though that title would make sense, but to me, using the term bio negates the rest of the connection that my daughter and I share. I actually believe there shouldn't be any prefix for the natural mother of a child. If there needs to be a prefix to differentiate between mothers then "adoptive" mother should be used.

Call your natural mother whatever you want. I don't know what your situation is with her but I'm not her and neither is Mirah. I think what Mirah is asking for is simple courtesy on HER blog. I don't think that's too much to ask.

Jodi said...

I am hearing you and I understand that your not ignorant in understanding biology but the way I read that article from yahoo the person who wrote it is ignorant.

We already discussed that the term "True and Real" family is offensive yet the person in this article thinks its OK to use these terms. As we discussed these terms could apply to either one of an adoptees 2 families.

My whole point is that issue on "Offensive" wording in adoption is hypocritical. It's only ok to describe biological/natural/DNA if we use other words that in the end mean the same thing. Just like that yahoo article. I'm trying to understand how anyone could find words that mean the same thing only worded differently could be offensive. No I dont get how one does not see this as hypocritical or how anyone sees biological ties in their family as the most offensive curse word unless they word it differently only to mean the same thing.

Your the first person I have EVER come across that has even brought up this issue with me.

That yahoo article is also from 2005 when not many people were DNA testing to find their biological roots and yes that is how us adoptees address the issue of DNA. DNA testing is here and with it the term biological will come up. It has come up and will continue to come up in conversation.

I as an adoptee have been called many hateful words, stupid, ungrateful, you Ap's are not your real family,Your mother gave you away because she did not want you, Im insensitive ect. I love the word biological, as an adoptee it make me feel like I finally came home. As an adoptee I searched to find by biological roots found them and came home. I know who Im related to, I have my medical history. I would just like to have my OBC since my secret is already out of the bag.

Mirah Riben said...

You either respect people and honor their wishes as to how they chose to self-identify, or you disrespect, offend and insult them.

It's your choice, but leave me alone on this as I have said all there is to say.

Mirah Riben said...

"It's only ok to describe biological/natural/DNA if we use other words that in the end mean the same thing."

And you label this "hypocritical.'

let me ask you this: What is difference between the terms: black, colored, darkie?

One coudl argue they all technically mena the same thing. yet one is acceptable and others are definately NOT! Can you get that, Jodi!

it's about the right to self-identify.

To YOUR ears and brain there is no difference. To others' ears there IS! Why can't you accept that that is each person's right to choose? Who put your in charge? You don't get to choose what WE call ourselves or prefer to be called. That would be as vile as telling a Black person that colored or darkie is the same thing so you don't see any reason to call him that after he has told you it is OFFENSIVE! What YOU think of what he is called is of no consequence. Neither is it your business what WE, mothers who lost our children to adoption prefer!

Do you get it YET?!?

Adult adoptees don't like being adopted children. I call my grown adult children my children. but I "get' why it is offensive and thus I do not use the term "adopted child" when speaking of an adult because I RESPECT them not to use a term that is offensive to them. i don't ARGUE with them that a "child" can be an adult child. i shut up and listen and respect their wish to SELF-IDENTIFY.

Mirah Riben said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Lorraine Dusky said...

Jodi: If you are still coming back to continue this discussion, I have a simple question. Would you find it weird to be called a "bio child" in contrast to the, uh, "children" [no modifiers] of someone? As in, Jodi is Jennifer's bio-kid...." silence when you are there with say, two sisters, who are not called "bio-children."

If someone finds some name offensive, such as "n$^&&!@," would you keep using the term?

An adoptive mother interjected herself into a conversation between a friend of mine and my husband a week after my daughter had died. My friend, who knew my daughter, and had seen her grow up as we reunited when she was 15 and she spent summers here for a while, used the term, Lorraine's daughter" when speaking. AM couldn't help herself, the second time she heard "Lorraine's daughter," she piped up with "birth daughter." I have never been able to look at the woman again without thinking of that. No one said anything to the AM.

You can call your mother your Bio Mom and think it's all perfectly fine, but when asked to not use the term, why come here and continually insult other mothers? It certainly seems perverse.

I am--or was--my daughter's mother. So is--or was--her [adoptive] mother her mother. We mourned our daughter together.

lorraine

Lorraine Dusky said...

Carlynn H: As for adoptive parents "correcting" our language, they feel absolutely no compunction to insult us by "correcting" us all the time. I am still somewhat friendly because of other circumstances with a neighbor (adoptive mother of Chinese girl) who told me that I should not refer to my daughter's adoptive parents as adoptive parents. "They are her parents," she said, giving me the look of moral certainty and superiority. I did not have the presence of mind to say, so what does that make me? Fucking chopped liver?

The culture bends over backwards in general to call African Americans what they wish to be called, black or AA. But when people call us what feels to us like the equivalent of N&^^er, we are supposed to take it. I hope today I would have the wherewithal to say something right on the spot if this comes my way again. I am sure it will.

Bio Mom indeed!

sign me,
A Natural Mother

Mirah Riben said...

"My biological father should be just as "Entitled" to have raised me as my biological mother." I agree. But please do not let you personal anger for your mother - albeit justified - to make general statements about natural mothers having "entitlement issues."

All natural mother AND fathers have or should have a legal. moral and ethical entitlement to their child.

Joy said...

Oh Mirah, you should have hung-out with me and the punk-rock clubs at underground clubs in the eighties, then you would be friends with anger. You could see that it is powerful force that can be fantasticly effective.

It clears away obstacles and fills you with the energy required to rise anew.

Let's all bow our heads at the mockery making Johnny Lydon as he leads us in prayer

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPj-8_wOZcA&feature=fvst

RussiaToday Apr 29, 2010 on Russian Adoption Freeze

Russi Today: America television Interview 4/16/10 Regarding the Return of Artyem, 7, to Russia alone

RT: Russia-America TV Interview 3/10

Korean Birthmothers Protest to End Adoption

Motherhood, Adoption, Surrender, & Loss

Who Am I?

Bitter Winds

Adoption and Truth Video

Adoption Truth

Birthparents Never Forget