Search Angel Help Requested: The Legacy of Adoption Loss

I am seeking the help of search angels for my former foster son (details at the end of this post), who found me about a year ago on Facebook. Scott calls me Mom, because sadly, though he was part of our family for less than a year, I am the closest thing to a mother he has ever had.

Scott's life has not been easy. He was dealt a rotten trifecta: taken and placed for adoption as an infant, rejected by adopters as a teen, only to find original family in a shambles, unable to be of much positive, constructive help. Scott has spent a good deal of life behind bars.

He is free and sober now and trying to get on track. But his job opportunities are severely limited because of his tangled identity. He cannot prove who he is!

Scott was born and adopted in NJ trough DYFS. Despite his female adopter telling him to "get out of here" and "go find your 'real family'," she refuses to be of any assistance and he has no birth certificate - original OR amended! 

Any suggestions or help would be most welcome.

The Back Story

 

My firstborn, Alicia, was born July 15, 1967. She was lost to adoption six months later, in early 1968.

In 1971 I married and moved from NYC to NJ start my life over as a suburban wife and mother. To redeem myself... maybe to prove myself.

Once settled into our new little cape cod house on Meadow Road, with no conscious connection, I began calling adoption agencies and telling them I'd like to adopt an "older" child of about 3 or 4. I thought, like many do today all the old cliches about their being so many kids who need homes and it would be a righteous thing to do.  A liberal act of altruism, not infertile desperation.  I was quickly told that "older" meant 10-12 and put the idea to rest.

I never made the connection that I was trying to replace my Alicia, who would have been the age of the child I was seeking, until much, much later. Was I also trying somehow to justify and believe the brain washing that adoption is a good thing, for the best?  Was I trying to make penitence for having "given away" my firstborn child? I gave one away so I will take one?

It was almost as if I was saying: "I'm ready for her now, God. I can give her that two-parent home i was told she needed and deserved."

During the next decade I had three children born 1974, 1976 and 1979. Two boys and a girl. I was labelled by family and some friends as "super mom" for home birthing, breast-feeding and always having a baby in a sling or back pack... never putting them down or letting them cry. "Spoiling" them by some standards of child care.

These were the happiest years of my life!  I felt fulfilled, and for the first time in my life proud of myself for my accomplishments in raising these three healthy children. (I had proved "them" all wrong." I WAS a fit and capable mother!)

Being a mother was so wonderful, there I was once again on the telephone inquiring about fostering. I went through the training and told them I wanted to foster teens. The year was 1983 and again, I made absolutely no conscious connection that I was seeking a teen to add to our family!

The folks at DYFS were ecstatic. they said that is the hardest population to place and the most in need. (The did send me a little girl first. Another tragic story, I won't go into...)

And then they sent David (now Scott) to us!  We welcomed him into our family with a big WELCOME HOME sign.

In a bizarre twist of fate, I quickly learned that David had been adopted as an infant, his adopters divorced and a-mom decided he was too much for her to handle. She had him living in the garage for some minor, teenage behavioral incidents at school.  And then, when he was 16, she dumped him into the foster care system and he came to live with me!

I found David's original family, which was not as much of a blessing as we had hoped for.

I look now at the photos and it so very clear to me today that as much as I ADORED my three kids, and had recently found Alicia,  something - someone - was missing from from our family photos.  

David was born April, 1968, just months after I lost Alicia.

Below is Alicia with my kids and I when I found her -- ironically, when she was 16.

Alicia is on her knees so I could see all of their faces together. 

Had she stood for the photo, it would be just like the other photos here.

The subconscious has a mind all its own and compensates in ways we may never fully come to grasp. And what a tangled web it can weave.

PLEASE HELP SCOTT IF YOU CAN!

 

Born Scott Woods 4/12/68 in NJ to Delores Fleischer Woods and Roy John Woods. Adopted in NJ by Loretta (Stern) Lippe and Gary Lippe and named David Lippe.

He has been using his original name Scott Woods for decades but has neither an original or amended BC and cannot get photo ID.

When Adoption Breaches Civil Rights

“A child’s circumstances may ‘require’ statutory intervention, perhaps may even ‘require’ the indefinite or long-term removal of the child from the family and his or her placement with strangers, but that is not to say that the same circumstances will necessarily ‘require’ that the child be adopted. They may or they may not. The question, at the end of the day, is whether what is ‘required’ is adoption.”

The [UK high] Court....   

....also reiterates three points made by Lord Neuberger in Re B.

(1) the child’s interests include being brought up by the natural family, ideally by the natural parents, or at least one of them, unless the overriding requirements of the child’s welfare make that not possible;

(2) the Court must consider all the options before coming to a decision; and

(3) before making an adoption order the court must be satisfied that there is no practical way of the authorities (including the Health Service) providing the requisite assistance and support and Judges must explore rigorously whether a Local Authority is seeking a Placement Order because resource issues make it unwilling to provide the necessary support. 

So says UK high court. 

* IF ONLY we could see such a stance taken in the U$A - the largest importer of children trafficked from around the world - instead of giving only lip services to protecting its children.   

* IF ONLY this position had been taken as multiple state and federal courts made decisions concerning Veronica and Dusten Brown. IF ONLY it would be taken in the case of Deseray and all other contested adoptions which have railroad the rights of natural parents.

It bears repeating: "the child’s interests include being brought up by the natural family, ideally by the natural parents, or at least one of them, unless the overriding requirements of the child’s welfare make that not possible."  The child's interest. What a concept!

* IF ONLY both the U$ and the UK took this position instead of its push for "permanency" of children in foster care, totally distorting the meaning of permanency in disrupting a family to create a new, unrelated one instead of working to maintain the integrity of the original family with resources and assistance. The essence of this UK Judgment is "confirmation of how seriously non-consensual adoption is to be treated in the family justice system" a problem there as well as here.

* IF ONLY American child care practices honored a child's identity as per the United Nations mandates and outlawed states' falsification of birth certificates and sealing of original birth certificates from adopted persons.

* IF ONLY children were not such a sought-after commodity. iF ONLY infertility rates so high, same sex couples were not now adding to the demand that creates and perpetuates child trafficking for adoption.  

* IF ONLY we as nations could stop the corruption, the exploitation to fill these demands and support struggling families.

* IF ONLY we honored a child's heritage, lineage, continuity, and right to identity, as well as his PERMANENCY within his family of origins.

* IF ONLY we honored the civil rights of every person including those adopted which means protecting their right to remain with the family of birth and if necessary to remove them from that situation to honor their identity.

* IF ONLY...

The Legacy of Veronica’s Tears and Traumas

Those dedicated to family preservation, child welfare, human decency, morality, father's rights, Indian rights, and ethical adoption practices are shedding tears over the culmination of Dusten Brown’s long, brave and determined battle to simply be a Daddy to his beautiful daughter, Veronica. Still facing a lawsuit, extradition and charges of felony custodial interference, he has very sadly lost the battle for his beloved Veronica.

Veronica – the child whose years-long legal custodial battle riveted a nation – has just turned four. Having happily settled in to life with her devoted Daddy and a large, loving extended blood-related family – not to mention her Cherokee Tribe - Veronica is now being made to suffer their loss in her life while simultaneously having to get to know people she has totally forgotten.

In the final dissenting decision, Justice Noma Gurich wrote: 

“We cannot ignore the fact that (Veronica), at the age of 27 months, has already been moved from one set of ‘parents’ to another, after lengthy judicial consideration of her best interests… Under the issues present to this court, an immediate change of custody without any consideration of her best interests will require a four-year-old child to resolve her feelings of loss and grief for a second time.”

Dr. Naranjan Karnik, a specialist in child and adolescent psychiatry at Chicago’s Rush University, commenting on the final decision to disrupt veronica’s life yet again, spoke of the courts to consider her best interests at all. Dr. Philip Fisher, a psychologist specializing in childhood trauma at the University of Oregon, said the final change in custody at 4 years old could result in “traumatic changes can actually hamper development in the part of the brain that helps someone make good decisions.”

There are many issues yet to play out while this child adjusts to the insanity of a life that just may disprove the old adage that you can never have too many people love you!

Will there be visitation?  How can we anticipate such an arrangement to be

voluntarily carried out now when Matt and Melanie Capobianco who have already initiated a half million-dollar lawsuit against Dusten for their legal fees?

They have initiated a lawsuit to recoup their expenses in the drawn out legal battle they CHOSE to continue instead of doing the moral – albeit difficult - thing and ending it the day they learned that Veronica had a father who was duped and wanted custody of HIS DAUGHTER!  Every penny they spent from that point forward was of their own choosing and opposed to the best interest of the child they coveted. Both Dusten and the Capobiancos should sue Christie Maldonado for orchestrating the whole thing and for perpetrating FRAUD.

Will Veronica have had the opportunity to know her Daddy – to see and FEEL his love? To hear HIS side of the story? If they do allow visitation, what will this child think?  If not, in ten years, when teenaged Veronica is at a computer and enters her name into a search engine…. what will she think?

It is hard to imagine how the Capobiancos can spin this into something that makes sense to Veronica and justifies their actions.  After all, it's not like they can say your mommy and daddy died...or, "they" CHOSE us...or, we "rescued" from an awful life of abuse and neglect, poverty...  Yet, one must assume that they justify it to themselves every day, and have since the start.

Will they continue the vindictiveness that Christie Maldonado engineered, put it into motion with deceit, and kept it going for years out of sheer vengeance? Will Veronica spend the rest of her life being brow-beaten by Christie and the Capobaiancos to the point of not being able to decipher truth form lies; a classic Stockholm Syndrome victim? How else can they justify their actions but to deify Dusten?

Adoption reform, Indian nation, fathers rights, and family preservation Bloggers must keep the truth out there for her to find. We must revisit the truth every year on her September birthday by sharing her daddy's parting words with her.

The Broader Legacy and Implications of Veronica’s Traumas

The effect on the Indian Nation and their national sovereignty is loud, clear and palpable. This case set devastating precedent for the ICWA – all but gutting it entirely, rendering it another treaty trampled on by US courts. 

The effect on adoption practice and it’s continued war against family preservation – and most viciously, the war on fathers – has intensified.

“Once these agencies and lawyers get the birth mother on the hook ... they tell these birth moms not to answer any calls from the dads,” said Shannon Jones, the Charleston attorney who represents Simmons (Desaray’s dad and grandmother) and Brown. “Of course, then they argue the dad is a deadbeat.

“It usually wins the day.”

Adam Pertman, Executive Director of the Donaldson Adoption Institute and an adoptive parent, said of the current state of adoption: 

“It’s a system that deep-sixes the rights of birth moms and dads.” “We give lip service to the best interests of the child, then we do things that constantly prove that the adoptive couple are the only people we’re concerned about.” 

Lip service indeed. Spoken by the king of adoption lip service himself, who like the attorneys in these cases has a livelihood dependant upon the continuation of the redistribution of children through adoption and cannot bit too hard on the hands that feed him.  Yes, adoptive parents are the only ones the system favors because they are the only paying customers. It is their demand that sets the wheels in motion and it is they who pay all the bills for the scum-sucking baby brokers and “facilitators,” industry lobbyists and spokespersons.

Desaray: Another Veronica?

Another case already looms: that of Desaray Simmons, being challenged by the Absentee Shawnee Tribe. The contested adoption of Desaray begins by following in the same footsteps as Veronica, involving  OK and SC and employing the very same South Carolina attorneys: Raymond Godwin and James Fletcher Thompson. One difference that hopefully might prove major: the couple trying to adopt Desaray did NOT secure interstate compact approval before leaving Oklahoma with her. Shawnee attorney Charles Tripp of Owasso, Okla., has argued that the baby was removed secretly, that neither the tribe nor the father got proper notice of the proceedings. An Oklahoma judge has since ordered Desaray’s return, but Godwin is fighting the move in South Carolina.

Godwin gets referrals from pastors, hospitals, attorneys and businesses that advertise for pregnant women. He then, conveniently sends them to his wife’s agency:  Nightlight Christian Adoption. Which in turn steers women toward what they consider one of the best options — and the one that pays both Goodwins’ fees - adoption.

“If she decides to parent, she’s going to be living in a life of poverty,” says Beauvais-Godwin, the attorneys wife and head of Nightlight, a statement that indicates the brainwashing applied to mothers in crisis and contradicts that the agency’s major concern is preventing abortion. “Savior” wanna-be adopters are allowed, in South Carolina, to pay: down payments on housing or a vehicle, rental fees, food and utility bills, in addition to medical expenses.

Remove profit in adoption and remove tragedies such as Veronica and Desaray,

Adoption reform is in dire need of more than lip service. There is far too much money to be made and far too few laws in place to curb abuses in private adoptions.

Put an end to pre-birth matching and direct payments from pre-adopters to expectant moms and loopholes on “expenses” – all of which is contrary to laws against pre-birth contracts. Pre-birth matching creates false expectations for adopters and expectant moms creating feelings of indebtedness and obligation.

Disallow the accepted predatory practice of adopters in the delivery room and allow new moms a time to bond and make a decision based on a real, live human descendant in her arms, not a concept.

Set appropriate time limits for taking a relinquishment and for the mother to revoke her consent. Even car sales have a cooling of period! SC, is here too one of the most lax states and why it has one of the largest number of adoption agencies and why they – and Utah - snatch expectant mothers from other states, a practice which should be outlawed.

But all we do is give lip service to each tragedy as it unfolds and then go right back to business as usual – taking people’s children through deceit and deception, using whatever means possible to coerce and exploit to get the desired COMMODITY to an ever-increasing market, now doubled by the acceptance of same-sex adoption in all but some religious agencies and some countries other than the U$.

In Conclusion

Veronica’s case, sadly, stands as proof that deceit can win. It is a testament to pure unadulterated vindictive mother vengeance triumphing. It is a flagship win for entitlement by virtue of paying for an adoption – celebrated by baby-snatchers far and wide who see natural parents as nothing more than a impediment, a road block to their heart’s desire to be pulverized and plowed over. See “Adoption Entitlement and Class Warfare: What makes the Capobiancos and others like them tick"? 

Veronica's Fourth Birthday - in Oklahoma with, her family, The Browns

Veronica’s case stands to demonstrate clearly that lies and deceptions, coercion, whatever – can, and too often are – victorious in the end. All you need is money, a whole lot of STUBBORN, and an equal amount of selfishness and a self-centered lack of concern for your child’s best interest or his or her roots, heritage etc.…. and you will prevail

In denying the Capobiancos’ first appeal, the S.C. Supreme Court noted the birth mother’s vengeful and deceitful attempts to conceal the adoption. 

Christina Maldonado first indicated on a form her hesitancy to identify the father, Dusten Brown, because of his ties to the Cherokee Nation. When she went to an Oklahoma hospital to give birth, Maldonado was on “strictly no report” status, preventing inquirers like Brown from learning that she had been admitted.

Vindictive vengeance, deceit, duplicity and fraud that led to Dusten’s name being misspelled and thus no proper notification to the tribe of an impending adoption. Accident?

Just as in other types of US court cases - including the most notorious OJ Simpson murder trail – it’s always about who has the better lawyer, not right and wrong.

Will Desaray be another victim of corrupt adoption and the failure of the courts to consider the best interest of children and the constitutional right of parents to nurture their own children unless proven unfit to do so?

Children are born to (at least) two parents. U$ adoption practice too often negates that fact.

Adoption is supposed to serve the needs of orphans and children who are abandoned, abused, neglected or unwanted….or whose parents – BOTH - are convinced that adoption is their willing choice.  Neither Veronica nor Desaray fit any of those categories. Both have loving, capable blood-kin who never abused or neglected any child and who never consented to an adoption.

In both cases, their adoptions should have been halted the moment a willing and able father – and/or extended family – stepped up to the plate and demonstrated in court a desire to overturn a pending adoption from being finalized. PERIOD!

We mourn with you, Dusten and we pray for Veronica....and Desaray...and for every child torn from loving family to become a prized commodity...

Adoption Entitlement and Class Warfare

What makes the Capobiancos and others like them tick?

Beyond adoption entitlement, bred by and fed on entitlement, lie predatory behaviors. They are subtle.

The following was posted on an adoption.com forum:

Can they really keep aunt away?

---

So yesterday we had our monthly meeting with baby girl's caseworker. It seems that nothing much has changed over the last month except vists are back on, but I really feel like that won't last very long. Baby girl is now just shy of 3 months and has only had 2 vists with mom, and alleged dad is completely out of the picture...he actually has insisted mom mgive baby girl up for adoption. Mom has another case in a bordering state for her 1 year old that has been in grandma's custody since birth. Mom completed parenting classes for her other case, but has done absolutely nothing else. Baby girl's caseworker stated that if the 1 year olds case was in our county...they would have already filed for TPR! So basically mom has done nothing in ether of her cases, and really doesn't look like she is going to change anytime soon. However; the caseworker did state that mom's aunt has called several times this week requesting temporary custody of baby girl. The caseworker said that something about the whole situation just didn't sit right with her, so she called the original case investigator to see if she new anything about aunt. Well, it seems the investigator had absolutely nothing nice to say about the aunt...I guess she was at the original staffing meeting and was going off on everyone. So baby girl's caseworker stated that there was absolutely no way she was granting temporary custody to aunt because she believes she will just turn the baby over to mom. So I guess my question is...can the caseworker actually refuse aunt? It seems she would have to at least request that she have a home study done...

The problem begins when a person or persons who feel entitled to a child - something the adoption industry instills in all infertile prospective adopters, ensuring them that there is a child for everyone (like a chicken for every pot). It then blossoms into full blown, blind, lustful, unstoppable predatory behavior when a child is identified as potentially "theirs."  

Once in the clutches of the adoption machine, well-meaning persons first are made to feel entitled by virtue of the fact that all of society deems them more "deserving" of a child than the sluts and dead beats that get "knocked up" by accident and "don't want" their kids.  While mothers are being brow-beaten into submission as to how undeserving they are, the paying clientele are whipped into a frenzy of belief that this is "their" baby and they must fight like a mother lion whose cubs are in fatal danger if they and they alone do not come to their rescue. Some have the additional backing of BELEIF that God himself has ordain this particular child to be theirs and they are doing HIS work to fight to protect this child and ensure it is whisked away to THEIR home and no other.

Then, just as the war machine turns innocent, well-meaning, patriotic young men and women into killing machines capable of committing MASS MURDER - shooting up villages, gassing them, or pushing people into ovens - and feeling JUSTIFIED having turned "others" into "the enemy"....the same is done to prospective adopters.  And make no mistake about it: this IS WAR! It is one of many aspects of class warfare being practiced in the U$A....  It's imperialism when babies are trafficked from overseas and washed clean and made legal by stamping the word "adoption" on what is done, and plain and simple class warfare when done within domestic borders and the exploited are our own citizens. In both cases it is the making of the underclass handmaid breeders for those who can affords to pay for their services and are made to feel ENTITLED to do so.

Matching cinches the deal.  

Once they are matched with a baby - born, unborn, or even just  a photograph of a child in an orphan overseas - any obstacle in the way is to be fought fiercely using any and every weapon available. Money is no object at this point. The goal is now an obsession and all is fair in this war in which they feel more than justified. The child is "theirs" in their mind and it triggers behavior beyond rational reasoning. They become totally convinced that the life of the child depends on THEM having THIS child!  They act - and perhaps feel on some level - that their own lives depend upon it.

This is where the Capobiancos and all other adopters in contested adoptions begin from and this is the position they maintain to the bitter end.

The attitude and behavior exhibited by adopters in contested or potentially contested adoptions is akin to that which we witness on “Survival” or “Big Brother” TV shows. It is what we see in women at a bargain basement 2-hour-only sellout sales on wedding gowns where it’s every woman for herself, pushing and shoving - claws out - to get the desired commodity. Every other “player” a rival for the gold ring, the prize, the “gotcha”, the WIN.

The first obstacles to overcome in the battle are the mother and the father. In this case, the father presents no threat to their goal. It is interesting to see how the mother, who presents little to no threat still needs to be painted as the enemy of this child…someone all parties involved need to work to keep from getting her hands on her own infant child, despite the fact that this sounds like a “voluntary” relinquishment with no abuse or neglect mentioned regarding either of the mother’s children.

The bigger threat here is the baby’s blood-related aunt, an adjunct to “the enemy”; an ally whose biggest threat is that she would conspire to give the child to evil birthmother! Thus the aunt’s insistent behavior is described in terms making it seem pathological and dangerous rather than the normal concerns of someone witnessing her sister being railroaded and her niece snatched away.

Time is viewed through distorted lenses in this mad dash for the finish line. Three months is felt as an eternity for the wanna-be child-snatchers rather than seeing it as a time for the mother to recover from childbirth, regroup, catch her breath, get her life together and figure out what she wants and what she needs to do to be a mother to her newborn child.

Yet the same time period is viewed very differently when judging the mother. In that regard, language is manipulated to subtly subvert the normal into something evil and suspicious. Instead of saying the mother visited twice in three months, note the seemingly insertion of the word “just” – minimizing her visitation to make her appear unloving, uncaring. The fact that the mom did “nothing” regarding either of her children is reported as if she had committed child abuse or neglect, and in fact blatantly ignores the two visits.

Of course, in the upside-down backwards, Catch-22 world of adoption anything a mother does or might have done overtly would be reported as inappropriate if not insane, just as the aunt’s behavior is viewed as other than a healthy, normal reaction to the coercion and exploitation of a member of your family. After all, our social mores say that once someone has CONSIDERED placing a child for adoption, they are defective, immoral, and UNFIT to parent.…(unless of course, they are adoptive parents who are “struggling” with a child who is “oppositional” and refuses to bond with them and behave; a child who cannot act as if they’ve experienced no trauma, experienced no rejection.)

There is thus not an ounce of human compassion for the mother, father or any extended family (such as the aunt in this case) as human beings in need and in pain.  They are totally dehumanized. Simply impediments standing between the goal of obtaining the prize and not.

In their heads, the prospective adopters are not fighting loving family to take their child away for them to fill their own greedy needs and desires.... but "saving" the child from an imaginary boogie man “enemy” of their own – and to a large extent society’s - creation. They create the lies about the original family and they firmly believe every one of them.

Far more importantly than depersonalizing the family as obstacles and enemies, is the fact that there is not one thought about what is best for this newly born infant child....just the assumption that, of course, adoption is "better" option. Just look at how much more money they have for lawyers to fight for what they want!

And, of course today, all of this is being done privately with “counselors” salaries dependent upon the completion of the adoption transaction. Thus, the “counselors” – baby broker facilitators -  are not asking about the child best interest, let alone asking the paid client to consider it when an extended family steps up to the plate challenging the ensuing adoption. No, the facilitator sides with the client in seeing this blood kin as an obstacle and an enemy of the goal of the completion of the legalized child abduction. They side with the client and instigate the we/they competitive war. Same for their attorney.

When they succeed, for adopters, adoption is sheer joy – the answer to their prayers; the fulfillment of their hopes and dreams. Most are incapable of thinking beyond or seeing any other perspective. Their joy blinds them to the pain and suffering their choices caused or the trauma and loss their child has experienced. No, they now create a new myth to cling to: "love" will heal all that. They feel lucky and blessed and are deliriously happy with their acquisition and since they lack the ability to any other perspective but their own - or see anyone else in the equation but themselves - they believe the child feels exactly as they do and is just as joyous.

In adoption, entitlement of those able to afford the fee, and the predatory behavior many display when things get tough, are as insidious as is White Privilege.

See also: Adopter Entitlement - The Brave New World is Here

Adopter Entitlement: The Bold New World is HERE

The late, great Annette Baran often used the phrase "child-centered adoption."  It seems that the concept (or was it always just a pie-in-the sky dream, an ideal, a goal?) died with her.

We all know that the Brave New World of creating human beings is here, but along with it we also have a BOLD and BRAZEN new era of adopters entitlement!

Of course, adoption has operated at the behest of the adoptive parent(s) - the only paid client in the alleged "triad."  But the arrogance, self-centeredness and self-indulgence of these people has gone off the charts lately. There is no shame.  Just me, me, me. The Internet is littered with "my adoption journey" blogs depicting every step of infertility struggles and the trials and tribulations of "excruciating and embarrassing scrutiny" adopters must "endure"...the exorbitant amounts of money they spend, often on failed adoptions...and on and on and on.... with them at the center of the drama seeking public sympathy for every indignation they "have to" suffer to simply become parents, all the while of course, ignoring the fact that they could more easily, quickly and far less expensively adopt from foster care.

And, if all that's not bad enough, we are subjected to those seeking our sympathy when they give up on a child!  We are supposed to understand and support them in their "difficult" decision to bail on their commitment of "forever" and dump the child entrusted to them. We are supposed to be supportive of their right to SUE adoption agencies for making false promises to THEM while they break their promise to an innocent, at-risk child!

The Unrelenting Battle to Adopt Veronica Brown. 

This case violates all sanity. I cannot imagine arriving from another planet and hearing of these non-related strangers fighting for their "right" to a child who quite obviously has a loving, caring family!  Isn't adoption - this alien might ask - supposed to be to help orphans and children who are unwanted, abused or neglected?

And so...in the center ring of today's adoption circus, ladies and gentlemen, kids of all ages...I give you Matthew and Melanie Capobianco, who held onto Veronica for nearly two years after knowing that her father wanted her and was doing everything in his power to stop them from adopting her. Now, they have the audacity to call the recent actions of Veronica's father, Dusten Brown, "kidnapping." ! ! !

After two years without allowing Veronica's father to visit, they now have the nerve to thumb their nose at Dusten's offer of visitation with this retort:

"Now that we were at the point where they knew the adoption would go through, they offered this as if they've been thoughtful and considerate to us all along." 

First, this sounds like kids in a schoolyard saying you hit me first. Secondly: Where is King Solomon when you need him? Does this statement not scream that they seem to believe this case is - or should be - all about THEIR best interest? Who are they thinking of here - Veronica or themselves?  Why do they presume that they deserve thoughtfulness or consideration in this matter at all?

But they are not alone. One of their supporters presents a classic case of the bold new era of adopters. Alicia Towler, bragging about "battling the tribe" for a child says: 

"Adoption has this unique dimension of connection — not only to your own family, but beyond, widening the scope of what constitutes love, family ties, and community. It is a larger embrace. By adopting, we stretch past our immediate circles and, by reaching out, find an unexpected sense of belonging with others."  

This woman's words could not be more ironic if she tried.  

Does she even hear herself?!  What about the "connections beyond" of the child??? What abut HER widening scope, love, family and community; her "larger embrace" her "belonging to others." ?

All meaningless. Only those of the adopter count.

The TRIBE that is this child's extended family fighting for her; her connections, her family, her roots, and her heritage.... are all exactly what these people are proudly bragging about fighting to TAKE HER from. Do they really have no inkling of that? Are they THAT blinded by their LUST for a child; their own neediness and desires?

Alicia ends by saying how blessed she and hubby were to have been "victorious" in their battle over the tribe.  Yes, it's all about WINNING the PRIZE!  It's all about THEM!

This is the tone of adoption today!  

There is no shame in fighting loving mothers, caring fathers, bereft extended family...whatever it takes to get what you paid for and feel you somehow DESERVE. And the public awards them with support and accolades for their "altruism." And our US government rewards them with tax credits!

This new bold breed of child snatchers not only wants to be patted on the back for paying for and fighting to take what they covet, but they also want our sympathy and pity!

Alice Hubbell writes about "Healing After Adoption."

We had been through the infertility roller-coaster and were still trying to recover from that when we got the call that we were going to be parents...
As a social worker I struggled with feelings I was not prepared for. Both my husband and I realized we needed to open our hearts and heal after our adoption.... As an adoptive parent, it took time for me to feel connected completely to this little baby and feel like he was really my son.... It took patience with myself to realize I also was grieving the loss of carrying my son in my own womb. I needed to allow myself to grieve and find peace... 

She realized "she" was grieving...but as an adopter and social worker she never gives one thought to the loss and grieving her baby is experiencing. No, again, it is all about HER feelings and how we, the public, should feel sorry for the loss she suffered and even adoption did not instantly heal.

This next example is second hand. It comes from Adoptionmania where it is copied from an online conversation elsewhere on the web. It goes like this:

Courtney:
 @gsmwc02 @anditweetsalot @shanellelittle @mrsrenkert actually; there are mental health criteria one must pass to b an adoptive parent

Greg
@WeMonetize: And what in your mind would deem them “mentally competent” to parent? And how does an evaluation ensure that?

Courtney
: Do you just think agencies should place kids to whoever knocks on their door and asks for one?

Greg: No, don’t think I ever said that. But you also don’t want to discourage good candidates.

Courtney: If they’re good candidates they won’t have an issue being evaluated

Greg: Again you have children and are clueless on the mentality of an infertile considering adoption.

Courtney: to be perfectly frank; I’m less concerned with adults fellings than I am with children’s welfare.

Greg: Less? I don’t think you do at all. You live in that bubble where no one else’s POV matters.

Courtney: read it again. I am LESS concerned about adults feelings than a child’s welfare.

Greg: Don’t have to read it again. You’ve made it clear you don’t care about pain or grief of infertility. We just need to suck it up.

Courtney: what do you think the adoption industry needs to do to accommodate infertility grief?

Greg: Recognize and support that grief. Don’t outcast the childless and look down on them as you. It’s an extreme hurt.

Courtney: I’m not understanding how the infertile are outcast in the adoption industry; I actually would say quite the opposite

Greg: It’s a society issue. Adoption community can help demand of adoption by not contributing to outcasting infertiles as u are.

Courtney: I am not outcasting infertile people; I don’t know where you get that from. I just don’t put their needs ahead of kids needs

Courtney: in what tangible way do you want support? This is what I’m not understanding.

Greg: Recognition of loss and not try to tell them they should just adopt a child in need.

7rin at Adoptionmania calls Greg and others like him "Poor Entitled Infertile (PIE for ease)." I call them Pathetic, Pity-Seeking Arrogant Child Snatchers. 

I am only surprised that Greg did not pull the infamous ace in the hole comment here that fertile folk who are able to reproduce don't have to jump through the hoops those seeking to adopt have to. This is the crux of much of the emboldened anger over in PIE-land. They refuse to recognize that adoption should at least maintain a semblance of a PRETENSE to be making the best choice for the child!  

But why should they recognize that when the entire process of American adoption practice revolves around them. It starts with their demand and serves to meet it. The entire adoption industry - every mega-billion dollar of it - is there to serve their every whim. What color, age, etc. do you desire? Here's a menu of options to serve you. Like customers seeking to purchase real estate, or a new vehicle, they are asked to consider how much they can afford to spend and how much time they can invest in waiting and are given lists of countries with prices and time factors to choose from.  

If there was ever a doubt in anyone's mind that children are simply a commodity in adoption - a product to be contracted for - it is evaporated now. Children are the product - with no rights allotted other citizens -- and their parents simply the disposable containers they arrive in.

Adopters like these EXPECT the public to both applaud and pity THEM, and, they call us bitter and angry! Damn right we are! 

PUBLIC PLEA to Matt & Melanie Capobianco

Dear Matthew and Melanie Capobianco,

In response to Sadness, joy inherent in SC couple's adoption case which is getting mass coverage in the media:

I know you love Veronica. And I believe that you sincerely thought you were helping a single mom who already had two kids. You thought you were helping a mother and you fell in love with her beautiful daughter.  I beg of you too see that you have been used all along as a tool of a vengeful woman, Christie Maldinado who was far more intent on vengeance for her ex than in doing what is best for veronica or her other two children. She deceived Dusten from the start and has used you to fight her battle and hurt Dusten, and made you paid the bills for it all!  It is never in a child’s best interest to speak badly of their parent as she has done.

Adoption is about helping children who are “unwanted" or not being well cared for. veronica was not wanted by her mother, but that has never bene true of her father. This little girl is happily with FAMILY who love her and are caring for her very well. Why take her away from that? Why would you do that, because you CAN?  How will you tell her later WHY you fought to keep her from her blood-kin who wanted her so very desperately? Is that love?

Stop the insanity! 
This is not adoption in the child's best interest. This is not "rescuing" an unwanted abused or neglected orphan.  This is a cruel TRAVESTY. She may be yours “technically” and “legally” yours, but she is not a piece of furniture. She is a little girl who has suffered enough already and is in a safe, loving place. Let her be! If you love her you’ll let her go. To take her is selfish. Have a heart and put HER needs first. That is true love.

Mirah Riben, author and adoption researcher...also a mother who made the greatest sacrifice and let my child go when I was told it was the unselfish thing to do and best for her....

The Harm of Labeling Adopted Children

Candigirl 63 writes on Adoption.com forums:

i know this sounds awful but i feel like giving up. i am disabled and adopted a baby girl 11 years ago. the adoption people told me her mom was a little slow. met the mom and indeed a little slow. i trusted the adoption people and adopted the little girl. as time went on she screamed and cried all the time. arching her back like she was possessed. i dug into her past and medical records and found mom was an alcoholic. looked up alcohol effect on babies. found fetal alcohol syndrome and saw facial pics. she had all the facial deformities as well as scrambled toes. i got her into counseling starting at 3 years old. although she was slow to learn, the worst was the horrible violent tantrums over little things. time goes on and her tantrums are still 3-4 times a week. she still arches her back violently and throws her head back and forth screaming high pitch screams. banging her small body into doors and walls. still. she goes to counseling as well as i do too. i learn as much as i can. by the time she is 11 i am the professional on fas and have to talk to the counselers about fas. but i am 50 and her violence is too much now. she rages at least once a week. she has taken a knife and threatened to kill me and herself. she destroys things and still throws the same violent tantrums like a rag dolls possesed. here it is now she is turning 13 . is now stronger than me and i am fearful. when she is not raging she is a wonderful loving and helpful daughter. but if i catch her stealing or lying and try to punish her its all over. even at school (special ed) she is throwing these rages for getting in trouble for minor things that most people wouldnt even give a second thought too. i dont know what to do. social services only offers the counseling. there is no respite. i live in calif. i am desperate. i forgot to add she was diagnosed fas at 3 by a geneticist. and i have had in home services twice. In this case, the alphabet soup de jur is FAS. Oftentimes it is one of a litany of common victim-blaming labels placed on adopted children, such as ADHD and RAD, as if inability to bond after years of depravation in an orphanage, never being touched or held is not a 'normal' reaction to the circumstances; as if inability to trust after multiple abandonments isn't a 'normal' reaction to what life has presented. As if the "cure" for children who cannot "bond" as a result of repeated abandonments is to abandon them yet again! As if a label gives the adopter an EXCUSE TO BAIL!  After all, they were not properly INFORMED! It wasn't what they "signed up for" - as if those who raise children we birthed always get a child with a guarantee. The labels serve to shift the focus to a "syndrome" that requires special treatment. In this case it shifts the focus of the mother to become an expert of FAS. Labels shift the focus away from adoption loss as the root of the issue, because after all adoption is what "saved" the child. Adoption is GOOD, not the problem!  Couldn't possibly be!  But what is at the root of every adoption is LOSS and separation. So what about becoming and expert on adoption LOSS and GRIEF? What about considering the POSSIBILITY that not all of this child's problems are attributable to pre-natal alcoholism or "bad blood" but that perhaps her rage and tantrums are a result of early TRAUMA caused by SEPARATION and loss?  Her inability to express her grief and her need to be given "permission" to grieve. I suggest this mother, CandiGirl, and other adopters dealing with challenging children read Primal Wound as well as books by adult adoptees like Jane Jeong Trenka to understand what it is like to be separated and live without knowing who you look like, and WHY you were given away. This is a teen in agony and pain.  This is a teen who is at high risk for substance abuse and self harm including suicide. And the causes are not all organic or hereditary. Adoption loss is a social issue - a psychological issue - that faces ALL who are adopted no matter how healthy their parents were. Recognize the loss and get her help to deal with THAT. Mom says she met her daughter's first mother. Does she ever talk to her daughter about her? Does she ask her if she wants to meet her mom and ask her why she wasn't able to keep her? Or does she assume, like far too many adoptive parents that her child does not care because she doesn't outright asks? Children are very sensitive to unspoken cues and can sense if the subject is difficult for their adoptive parent(s), especially if it brings tears to their eyes, or they quickly change the subject or just avoid it to begin with. Silence equates to shame. Adopted children easily interpret that the subject of adoption is TABOO, thus it means there is something BAD about it and something bad about ME. Their fear of being rejected - yet again - keeps them bound to the secret tone set by their adoptive parent(s). One clever adoptive mother found a simple way to let her teenaged son know the door was OPEN for those discussions by doing little things like when seeing him looking in the mirror saying: "I bet you wonder who you look like. I do."  These little gestures let a child know it is NOT a forbidden subject and that it won't ruin his or her relationship with you to talk about "it" or ask questions, expressive of NORMAL, health curiosity. Another approach might be at or following a family event such as a wedding, or when looking at a photo album, to say: "Gosh, all these people are my blood-related kin, I bet you must wonder about yours!"  Or, perhaps at your son's piano recital or your daughter's soccer game to ask if he or she is curious where he or she got that special talent! Curiosity is normal! Where did I get my nose, eyes, hair or strong math sills?  Why do I hate the sports or political views or food my adoptive family all love?  Recognize it! Don't let it become an elephant you and your child trip over to avoid talking about. Open the door for them. Let them know it's a safe topic of discussion just as you might do to help start a conversation of sex education or drugs in school, or safety on the Internet and 'strangers'.  All of these are tough but necessary conversations for parents to have. Adoptive parents have two added one: adoption and birth families. If it feels too hard to have this conversation, start with therapy to deal with your fears.  Perhaps you have unresolved issues over your infertility; the loss of the child of your "own" you couldn't have. Perhaps you harbor fear that blood is thicker than water and you will loose your child to their "real" parents and become a mere long-term babysitter. While unrealistic, these fears are not at all uncommon and need to be dealt with in order to help your child deal with THEIR fear of rejection and abandonment....which are palpable when you are in fact at the point of considering the option of bailing on them!  When you are thinking and talking about not being able to "take it" anymore.  The more you think that way, the more your child will push and test to see if you will in fact abandon them yet again. Start with some therapy for mom and some reading and educating about adoption loss issues, and then apply some compassion and help for your child to deal with their very issues of loss and rejection and abandonment. Instead of seeing your child as label, as a "patient" with a "disease" or "syndrome" that needs to be treated, think of them as a scared, lost child in pain who needs understanding and acceptance.