Tuesday, July 7, 2009

Abortion/Adoption: Faulty Study/Faulty Comparisons

Abortion Has Greater Impact on Parenting than Other Forms of Pregnancy Loss, New Review Finds, LifeSiteNews.com

July 6, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A new review of studies examining various types of prenatal loss and the effects on subsequent parenting has concluded that abortion may be "particularly damaging to the parenting process."

The article, published in Current Women's Health Reviews, looks at already published studies on miscarriage, induced abortion and adoption. The author, Priscilla Coleman of Bowling Green State University, focuses on psychological reactions to these various types of loss and discusses how they might affect a mother's relationship with children born after the pregnancy loss.

It is now known that women usually begin feeling maternal attachment in the early stages of pregnancy. The paper notes that despite the increased responsibilities and stress involved in raising children, "numerous studies have documented positive psychological characteristics associated with motherhood including increases in life satisfaction, self-esteem, empathy, restraint, flexibility and resourcefulness in coping, and assertiveness." Losing a child before or at birth, for any reason, however, "can be a profound source of suffering."

While all forms of pregnancy loss can cause emotional distress that can impact future parenting, the available research indicates that emotional responses after induced abortion are more likely to go unresolved and to persist for a longer time period.

Coleman writes that "society understands that women who miscarry or relinquish a child through adoption may experience sadness and grief." However, she continues, grief after abortion is "socially sanctioned because abortion is not acknowledged by our culture as a human death experience." Consequently help to deal with the experience is usually not offered.

"In many cases, women may suppress thoughts and emotions related to an abortion, because they have not been able to process and or/openly express negative emotions," Coleman writes, adding that the lack of acknowledgement and support after abortion gives the "covert message that others would rather not hear what we have to say, and this makes it difficult to even identify our reactions to our losses."

Finding help and support after abortion is further hampered by the belief that, unlike other forms of pregnancy loss, abortion is optional and therefore women experience less distress afterwards. However, having an abortion is "sometimes quite inconsistent with the woman's true desires," says Coleman, (one survey found that 64 percent of American women who had abortions reported feeling pressured to abort), and many women, especially those who feel conflicted or didn't want the abortion, do feel emotional distress afterwards.

"The best evidence regarding negative effects of abortion indicates that 20-30 percent will experience serious psychological problems," Coleman says. "With 1.3 million U.S. abortions performed annually, a minimum of 130,000 new cases of abortion-related mental health problems appear each year."

While abortion advocates frequently argue that abortion is better than carrying an unplanned pregnancy to term, the evidence suggests otherwise.

Studies of women with unplanned pregnancies found that women who aborted had higher risks of depression, substance abuse and anxiety, and teens who aborted an unintended pregnancy were more likely to experience negative mental health outcomes than their peers who carried to term. Further, a recent New Zealand study led by a pro-choice researcher found no evidence that abortion provided any mental health benefits to women even in cases of unplanned pregnancy.

The paper describes a number of ways that a previous abortion can affect a woman's relationship with her living children:

- Increased depression and anxiety. Abortion has been linked to higher rates of maternal depression and anxiety before and after birth, which may affect the woman's relationship with her children. In addition, depression is a common predictor for child abuse.
- Sleep disorders and disturbances. Women who have had an abortion are more likely to experience sleep disorders compared to women who carry to term, and one survey found that many women attributed the sleep disorders to a past abortion. These sleep disturbances "could render the high energy demands of parenting more complicated," says Coleman.
- Substance abuse. Studies have found that women who had an abortion were more likely to engage in substance abuse, and also more likely to smoke or use drugs or alcohol while pregnant. Mothers who abuse drugs or alcohol are more likely to "engage in authoritarian and punitive parenting practices," and parental substance abuse increases the risk that the children will suffer abuse or neglect.
- Child abuse. Abortion has been associated with lower emotional support for one's children and with a higher risk of child abuse and neglect.

Abortion has also been linked to higher rates of suicide and to a wide range of mental health disorders. Coleman was also the lead author of a study published in The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, which found that the children of women who had abortions have less supportive home environments and more behavioral problems than children of women without a history of abortion.

While the review by Coleman notes that not every woman may experience psychological problems after abortion that will carry over into her personal relationships, "some women will have carryover effects into the parenting realm." The paper points to a need for better screening and awareness of possible psychological problems after miscarriage, adoption and abortion, and for more research to examine the effects of abortion.

----------------

I bet you're thinking this woman has not done her homework. She's not read Rickarby or other studies on the lifelong effects of adoption loss....or is intentionally ignoring those facts to prove her own pro-life position. Simple common sense tells you that whatever attachment is formed during the first trimester is multiplied by three if one carrie a child to term, and then is greatly increased by going through labor and delivery...not to mention knowing that a real, live human being is "out there" somewhere - or you can see, but not parent. Mothers who have experienced both an abortion - or miscarriage - and a loss to adoption report that the adoption is the more painful of the two.

Well, you're not alone:

Priscilla K. Coleman is an Associate Professor of Human Development and Family Studies at Bowling Green State University in Ohio.[1] Coleman has published numerous studies in peer-reviewed journals regarding abortion and mental health.[2][3]

The conclusions of Coleman and her co-authors have been criticized by the American Psychological Association (APA)[3] A panel convened by the APA has written that the studies by Coleman, and her co-authors have "inadequate or inappropriate" controls and don't adequately control "for women's mental health prior to the pregnancy and abortion." [3]

Research associates of Coleman's have also been criticized. In an unpublished letter to the Journal of Anxiety Disorders, on file with PublicEye.org, Jillian Henderson and Katharine Miller state:

"We believe that Cougle, et al., operate with strong political views regarding abortion, and unfortunately their biases appear to have resulted in serious methodological flaws in the analysis published in your journal.... All are involved in building a literature to be used in efforts to restrict access to abortion." [4]

References

1. ^ BGSU.edu
2. ^ "Is there a Post Abortion Syndrome"? The New York Times
3. ^ a b c NOW with David Brancaccio PBS
This article may contain inappropriate or misinterpreted citations that do not verify the text. Please help improve this article by checking for inaccuracies. (help, talk, get involved!) (May 2009)
HINOJOSA: In emails, two prominent independent scientists, on a panel that is reviewing the scientific literature for the American Psychological Association told us the studies have "inadequate or inappropriate" controls and don't adequately control "for women's mental health prior to the pregnancy and abortion."
4. ^ Correspondence between Jillian Henderson and Katharine Miller and journal editors Michel Hersen and Cynthia Last, January 13, 2004 on file at PRA.



-------

And...for another bad comparison of abortion and adoption..."Is Adoption Reform Common Ground on Abortion?"

My reply:

Missing the Most Loving Option

Pitting adoption and abortion against one another or even in the same sentence is wrong for several reasons.

Adoption cannot - or at least should not - be considered until there is a fully independent human being living to consider placing for adoption. Adoption/abortion dichotomies such as this rely on a totally false and unsubstantiated assumption that women who lose children to adoption -- voluntarily or involuntarily - are more apt to consider abortion than those who don't.

This is offensive to mothers who have made what many pro-lifers like to call a "loving sacrifice." It is also thoughtlessly offensive and hurtful to adoptees of all ages, who are made to feel "grateful" that they weren't adopted and need not be any more than any other person. As the trailer for the movie "My Sister's Keeper" states: MOST babies are accidents. Your argument omits the two most important aspects of this debate: First, increased sex education and access to birth control to reduce teen pregnancies which is done quite successfully in western Europe.

Secondly, the most loving, most caring, most difficult option of all: mothering. A moral society supports this decsion over all others and provide resources to encourage family preservation as the option of choice. Expectant mothers in temporary crisis or struggling financially need support. What they do NOT need is to be pulled between political, religious camps or exploited and coerced by a multi-billion dollar adoption industry that depends financially on family separations and the redistribution of children. This mega industry employs marketing agents and lobbyists to exploit and coerce mothers and commodify their babies to meet a demand...often successfully gaining well-meaning pro-life supporters ... while more than a hundred thousand children in foster care COULD be adopted! Shame, shame on all of you!

Saturday, July 4, 2009

Yes...It CAN get weirder still....

Michael Jackson made adoption offer to Nadya Suleman


    StumbleUponDiggRedditMixxdel.icio.usMySpaceFarkFacebookTwitThisPropellerWikioYahoo! Buzz

nadya-suleman-michael-jackson

…and the tabloids imploded.

The Telegraph is reporting that upon hearing the news of the Suleman octuplets, Michael Jackson offered to adopt the eight children to “give Blanket siblings.” Suleman’s lawyer Victor Munoz says he declined the “creepy” offer on Suleman’s behalf. (Because she’s not creepy at all?)

The obsessed with children pop star apparently had three representatives reach out to the Octomom camp before personally calling to speak with the unemployed mother of fourteen children. Jackson was said to be “concerned” regarding reports that Suleman planned to give Malia, Jonah, Isaiah, Nariah, Jeremiah, McCai, Josiah and Noah up for adoption. Because that would be scandalous!

From the article:

According to Munoz, speaking to the Daily Mirror, Jackson told him “Blanket would love to have more siblings”.

“I could take care of all the babies, they could live with me and wouldn’t need for anything. They would have a bright future,” he is said to have told him.

“I want to take care of Nadya. She will be happy and won’t have to worry about caring for her children any more.”

Munoz said that “Michael clearly thought Nadya was unfit and decided he wanted to help [the] children,” but also indicated that the tone of the calls became less about concern and more like a sales pitch. Munoz said the last call indicated that Suleman would “be compensated” in an adoption scenario.

============

AND...if you think you have heard the last bizarre twist in this case...Debbie Rowe was described in a 2008 report as: "The adopted daughter of a millionaire couple from Malibu" !! It also says: "Rowe was a late developer both sexually and emotionally - she was 30 before she had her first serious relationship."

==========

I have one question about Michael that has nothing to do with his kids. Why would such a narcissistic person, who was reportedly obsessed with death and thought he would die young like Elvis...not make his own funeral arrangements and get permission to be buried at Neverland?

Friday, July 3, 2009

Leaving the Board of Origins-USA

Sarah Palin and I have something in common - other than supporting options other than adoption. We are both leaving our offices for other pursuits, and not running for re-election in upcoming elections.

I enjoyed serving two terms on the board of Origins-USA, one as chair of Public Relations and the second as Vice President of Communications. I hope I contributed as a member of the blog and membership committees, edited one issue of the newsletter, helped design the current logo with its mobius theme, prepared Press Releases, helped edit the website and worked with other board members on Position Papers, among a myriad of duties.

I remain a lifetime member, as well as a HUGS volunteer - a program I conceived - and maintain a strong commitment to, and am fully allied with, the goals and missions of Origins-USA. As such, I will continue to collaborate and contribute in any manner I am able to, and continue to donate my books to donors.

Origins-USA and I share a focus on family preservation, however, as it names implies, Origins-USA is concerned primarily with domestic adoptions.

Domestic infant non-family adoptions currently represents a relatively small number adoptions by Americans today, and are part of larger global issue of child trafficking that exploits poverty to meet a demand.

The U.S. models many trends and is a major player in international adoptions as one of the largest importers - creating a great deal of the world's demand for infants - and, inexplicably, is also an exporter of babies. Almost of these involve exploitation and various degrees coercion from subtle to kidnapping, while leaving behind older children and children with special needs, both domestically and worldwide. I believe very strongly in a need to keep these atrocities in the spotlight and utilize world pressure to curb abuses. Despite shortcomings, The Hague has already forced the closing of some agencies with the U.S., who were unable to meet compliance..or who merely lost too much income as a result of the international regulations being put in place.

I will thus be devoting more of my time collaborating with others who share this broader, more international focus on adoption as part of child trafficking. I am working on a revised Stork Market II, traveling to Guatemala, writing, publishing... working to get the attention and assistance of Amnesty International for the Guatemalan children who need DNA testing. I have an upcoming presentation in Toronto in the Fall and look forward to more.

And so on this most American holiday, I declare my Independence.

Stay tuned to this blog ....

Orphan Movie Update

"ESTHER Just Wants Her OBC"
shirts available in many colors and styles
at Cafe Press


UPDATE OF EARLIER POST:

After all the brew-ha-ha (as in an uproariously funny big fuss-about-nothing) about the trailer which had the start character, orphan Esther ponders aloud that it must be hard to love an adopted child as much as their own...and adoptive parents in this country saw that somehow as a threat to their sanctity and petitioned Warner Bros pull the trailer......(OR, was it all just clever publicity?)


NOW, there are TWO NEW TRAILERS:

The first, a greatly abbreviated version of this, reveals that esther may not be an orphan at all since the orphanage never heard of her! Dum dah-dah-dum-dum...


In yet another preview showing on TV the ap says:

"I want her out of the house no matter what it takes."

BUT wait, wait...that's not all!!

There's more......

..............................................................................................................................................................................................................

..................................................................................................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................................................................................


She then says:

"I'll do anything to protect my children."


.............................................................................................


That's right - adoptive mommy says "my" children about her other - REAL - kids!!

Wonder if there will be complaints about that?


Serendipitously... while researching something else recently, I came across advice on adopting a child into a family that already has biologically connected (real!) kids, as did actress
Mary-Louise Parker. Preker says among questions she was asked about her newly acquired African child, is this gem: ""Somebody asked what her name was, and I told them Aberash. They said, 'Did you make that up, or did she come with that?' Like she was a car!"

"Many families blend biological and adopted children," the article informs us. (Adoptive Families magazine estimates that about 25% of its readers also have biological children.) Are there unique challenges in bringing home a child who’s been adopted when you already have biological children at home?

Of course -- but it might be less complicated than you think, says Adam Pertman, executive director of the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute. "Sometimes we think this is harder, or odder, than it really is. There are lots of complex kinds of families. What is it like when there are step-siblings, or half-siblings? What is it like when you live with a grandmother who takes care of the family? That doesn't mean you don't think it through, but I don't think we should be making it a bigger deal than it is, either."

Adam Pertman says: "It’s not unusual or weird or problematic. It's just another way to be a family. Talking about the issues involved in adoption is fine, but talking about them obsessively is not. You don't make a big deal out of normal things."

As you prepare to adopt, keep your older child or children involved in the process (in an age-appropriate way) -- show them pictures and talk about what will happen. If you're preparing a family profile, let your children tell you what they'd like their part of the profile to say.

To help you, your child, and the rest of your family prepare and adjust, Adoptive Families magazine recommends Brothers and Sisters in Adoption: Helping Children Navigate Relationships When New Kids Join the Family, by Arleta James, a clinical therapist at the renowned Attachment and Bonding Center of Ohio.

Nice that existing kids are prepared...but I see little preparation for the new incoming child...and a total absence of the how to deal with the reverse situation: helping an adopted child adjust to a subsequent child BORN into their family!! It happens...we all know it does. And could represent quite a threat...

Thursday, July 2, 2009

Debbie Rowe Heading for a Row Over Kids?


If the latest report is true, Debbie Rowe is entering the rink to battle for custody of the kids, about she once said:

"These are his children . . . ," she testified during his sexual abuse trial. "I had the children for him. They wouldn't be on this planet if it wasn't for my love for him. I did it for him to become a father, not for me to become a mother. You earn the title 'parent.' I have done absolutely nothing to earn that title."

After getting a reported $8.5 million in a divorce from Jackson, she agreed to no visitation.

She also allegedly said:

"I was just the vessel. It wasn't Michael's sperm. Just like I stick the sperm up my horse, this is what they did to me. I was his thoroughbred."...."I know I will never see them again. I was never cut out to be a mother - I was no good. I don't want these children in my life. My children are my animals now."

So, if the rumors are now true that she plans to fight to custody, and face more media and public hatred than the OctoMom and OJ Simpson combined...what do YOU think?

Public opinion does not count in court and legal pundits agree, Michael's Last Will not withstanding, custody will be judged based on the children's best interest. The will requests his mother, now 79, have custody and Diana Ross after her death. But the wishes of a dying person are considered just a suggestion.

Is is best for them to be with Debbie Rowe, if she can now, as she allegedly claims, prove she is their biological mother?

In disputed divorce custody, children over 12 have some say in who they want to live with. Who would the kids chose - the grandmother they have known somewhat, or a mother they've never met since infancy? Wonder if they ever asked and what they might have been told by Michael about their mother(s)? My guess is he told them they were abandoned by their mother...which they in fact were.

Is there any way this tale can have a happy ending of these misbegotten
parentless orphans?

Kidnapping or Adoption?

A "TV expert" attorney commenting on the custody possibilities for the Michael Jackson children, particularly whether Debbie Rowe would have a shot at custody....said that it does not matter if Jackson was nether their biological father or adoptive father of any of the children. He has raised them and that makes them his. HUH?? Does she as an attorney really equate children to possessions? Does the law? Even so, does the law now uphold the schoolyard rule of law: finder jeepers, losers weepers?

Applying the "possession is 9/10ths of the law" rule to children is not only gross and clearly makes property of them - as in slaves (even if their "job" is only to look cute) - it also suggests that the dame would apply for any kidnapper...thus bringing us full circle right back to the start of this post...

Online Legal Dictionary defines kidnapping as:
The crime of unlawfully seizing and carrying away a person by force or Fraud, or seizing and detaining a person against his or her will with an intent to carry that person away at a later time....

As for punishment it says:
A person who is convicted of kidnapping is usually sentenced to prison for a certain number of years. In some states, and at the federal level, the term of imprisonment may be the remainder of the offender's natural life. In jurisdictions that authorize the death penalty, a kidnapper is charged with a capital offense if the kidnapping results in death. Kidnapping is so severely punished because it is a dreaded offense. It usually occurs in connection with another criminal offense, or underlying crime.
I cannot help but think pedophiles such as Peckenpaugh, Mancusco and now social worker Frank Lombard - all of whim "adopted" children with the sole intent and purpose of using them as sex slaves. Why is this still called adoption and not what it is: kidnapping? Even Joel Steinberg who "adopted" two kids but never filed for their adoption and abused both, killing one...was never charged with kidnapping - or murder - and all throughout the case it was referred to as an "illegal adoption'" instead of a kidnapping.

And now of course we have as many as a thousand children in this country who were "adopted" from Guatemala, any number of whom very well may have been kidnapped with no one investigating. See also: DNA.

In Jackson's case, he allegedly never filed to adopt any of these children either and it now appears none are biologically related to him. Does that not clearly constitute kidnapping, or baby selling? Or did he cleverly get around that loophole - at least re the first two by marrying his surrogate?

Wikipedia says:
In modern usage, kidnapping or abduction of a child is often called child stealing, particularly when done not to collect a ransom but rather with the intention of keeping the child permanently (often in a case where the child's parents are divorced or legally separated, whereupon the parent who does not have legal custody will commit the act, also known as "childnapping").

One legal explanation/opinion about surrogacy and adoption appears at: Michael Jackson’s Kids and the “Parent Child Relationship” - An Intro to Legal Issues with Surrogacy, Third Party Reproduction, and Adoption

It all leaves this blogger wondering: Is there a difference between adoption and kidnaping anymore? Where is the line that separates what is considered a noble act of altruism from a felony that is just on step short of premeditated murder?

Wednesday, July 1, 2009

DNA: Determined to kNow Ancestry



James Barnes, 54, of Michigan felt he never belonged in his family. Recently he fixated on a photo of a 5-year old New York boy who was kidnapped and became convinced that it was him.

The FBI stepped in and conducted DNA testing to confirm or deny the possibility of a crime having been committed. Turns out - no foul play just an overactive imagination.

---------------

Today, there are as many as 1000 children being raised in the US after having come to the US through adoption, who may in fact have been kidnapped from their Guatemalan mothers and trafficked through baby brokers to orphanages with falsified papers.

Why has the US government failed to conduct an investigation including DNA testing to determine if crimes have been committed in any of these adoption? Is adoption that sacrosanct?

The mothers whose children were taken - some at gunpoint - are DEVASTATED as is any victim of a kidnapping and deserve answers...and deserve them in as timely as possible ...not after the kids have "bonded" to much to be separated from "the only family" they've known! We've heard tat game played ll too often in contested adotpions, though the children who have been retutned are doing just fine.

How would an adoptive parent deal with their child asking them ata some point why they kept them knowing the truth of their ill-begotton adoptions? How will they answer why they didn't INSIST on a DNA test?

In kidnappings does time matter? Even in parental kidnappings kids are returned....or at the very least visitation granted!

-----------------

Here at home, the Jackson custody case is the Anna Nicole Smith / Dannielynn case times three squared. The classic old joke that we always know who the mother is, doesn't even apply for any of the three kids who were created to be intentionally motherless.

Ironically, however, it appears that Michael was not the father of any of them in any way, shape, or form...except custodial.

It has now been alleged that the biological father of the two Jackson/Rowe kids is Arnold Klein the dermatologist Rowe worked for.

This would open a huge can of custody worms - or a huge barrel of money. IF in fact DNA confirm that Klein's sperm was used, that makes him the baby Daddy...AND it seems that only Rowe signed away her rights in a surrogacy agreement. That seems like it might put Klein in the catbird seat that gave Larry Burkhard the kid and the bucks....and few moments of fame.

Rowe's rights are far more precarious since she did allegedly sign away her rights....and. also because it may not have been ova!

If it is also true that Jackson never applied to adopt the children - believing they were in fact conceived from his sperm - then neither he nor Rowe are biological or legal parents of the two kids. Whose kids are they then??

The good news for Katherine Jackson, Michael's mother, who has been awarded temporary custody of his children, may not have to face a custody battle against his ex-wife Debbie Rowe, because the kids are reportedly not hers. The bad news for Katherine: the kids are reportedly not his, either.

The youngest creation raised by the King of Pop - now 7 year old Prince Michael Jackson II - - even more of a Thriller mystery! That poor over-the-balcony, blanket draped baby is the most peculiar anomaly of all. All anonymous: anonymous egg donor, anonymous sperm ad anonymous womb. All bought and paid for! How is this stuff legal? Does it not open the door for any pedophile or other perverts to create such anonymous kids for sex slaves - or (shudder) even snuff films - or whatever?

Seems even DNA would only be able to reveal who is NOT related to this poor anon-being. There is virtually no chance of finding the sperm or egg donor and as for the renta-womb, even if someone believes it may have been them - they have no biological or legal connection and would just reveal themselves as a woman willing to prostitute herself and sell a child she carried....allegedly without knowing to whom or for what purpose. Not a heartwarming candidate for mother of the year. Or was she young and naive enough to believe she was helping someone, anonymously?

What does this child's birth certificate say??

The WILL: Katherine and Joe and the rest of the Jackson clan suggesting that Michael had no will has been called insincere best as why wouldn't someone with an entourage of attorneys not? Joe J. actually used the spotlight of his son's death - before he was even buried - to plug his new record label! How many ways can you spell exploitation and TACKY!

Is child custody preference covered in the will? What precident would that take? Is the nanny given custody? If it's anyone other than Katherine, they WILL contest, though how fit is she at 79. And Joe? P-LEASE!

The currently most recent will found was written prior to the birth of the third creation. Is he included as in "all of my child?" Is that anonymous being "his" child in any legal way? baby buying is still illegal is it not?

Yes...this will eclipse the Dannielynn baby drama - far more players!

DNA: Determine None Anonymity

Oh...and none of these kids have any medical history, except maybe Klein's.

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