Tuesday, July 31, 2007

Adoption, Fire and Murder

Within a week - two gruesome cases:

One has made headlines around the nation because it involved a wealthy family in Connecticut...a mother and two teenaged daughters killed in a fire after a home invasion burglary.

It soon surfaced that one of two parolees who committed this atrocity, Joshua Komisarjevsky, 26, was adopted.
While this horror was unfolding and being digested, anther story hit the media:

William E. Wheeler was trapped inside his burning home on March 22, while his 16-year-old adoptive daughter, Codee, allegedly stood outside in the front yard "calmly" talking on her cell phone and waving away potential rescuers.

It has now been reported that in the first case, the adoptee perpetrator first learned he was adopted at the age of fourteen - exactly when his criminal career began. Komisarjevsky became a "cat burglar" breaking into homes close to his own in Cheshire.

If there is any doubt in anyone's mind that the connection between adoption, fire and murder is not as random as one would think, they need to read Adoption: Uncharted Waters by David Kirschner.

Kirschner contends that the most crucial part is the way children are told they are adopted. Obviously 14 was not the optimal time...and one wonders if it was said before or after he started "acting out" and how and why it was said.

Kirschner has appeared as expert witness in a number of murder cases and presented Adopted Child Syndrome on behalf of the defense for the trial and/or sentencing, as detailed in his book. He has intensively interviewed adoptee killers including some of the most notorious serial killers - a disproportionate number of whom wreadopted. They all reported strong feelings of abandonment.

The lits of serial killer adoptees includes: David (Son of Sam) Berkowitz, Joel Rifkin, Ken Bianchi (the Hillside Strangler), Eugene Gerald Stano. A list of adoptee killer, exlcuding the most recent is available at: www.geocities.com/Wellesley/9950/adoption_serialkillers.html

UPDATE 12/10/11: Joshua Komisarjevsky was sentenced to death. His "forever" adoptive parents were not present.  Now another young adopted man, Gabriel Hall is charged with murder and his "forever" adopters are not getting him an attorney or attending any of his hearings. 

Monday, July 23, 2007

Adoption Activism Takes to the Streets




1989: Kate Burke was president, Dirk Brown VP of the AAC and Joe Soll of CERA, which held a national conference in c NYC. Outside the Hotel Roosevelt, I organized street theater: Conference participants wrapped the Hotel Roosevelt (a full city block) in red tape to signify the bureaucracy that separates adoptees and their mothers. We then held a tape cutting ceremony.


That same year the AAC, CERA and Origins (NJ) held the first march to H.E.AL. to promote Honesty and Equality in Adoption Laws. Marchers walked from New York to Washington, D.C., and were joined by more than 500 supporters from all over the nation. The march rally and speak out were covered well by the media and officially began the AAC's existence as "a little known civil rights movement."






















Right and above - the troopers who walked from NYC to Washington: Joe Soll (CERA) organizer, Sharon Bell (reunited mother from NJ, subsequently succumbed to cancer), Marilyn Burson (mother from Maryland reunited with a grave of her neglected infant son who fought with her last dying breath to have her son reburied with her, deceased), Judy Taylor (reunited mother from Conn.), Joyce Bahr (mother from NYC)...

They were joined by hundreds who crossed the bridge with them from Maryland into Washington for a Speak Out at the Lincoln memorial. As we marched we chanted: "What do we want? Open records When do want them? Now!"














Above (L to R): Mary Anne Cohen, Sherry Chait and Mirah Riben with the Origins quilt of patches for our kids.




Left: We broke the seal on a huge amended birth certificate.










L: Carol Gustavson, President, Adoptive Parents for Open Records.

Sunday, July 22, 2007

1987 in Adoption Reform History

In 1987 tragedy struck in NYC that reverberated around the world. A six-year-old named Lisa was abused and beaten to death by her attorney adoptive father while her adoptive mother stood by and did nothing. Seasoned NYC police officers said they had never seen a darker, filthier, drug-filled apartment or such horrendous abuse both to the child and the mother – who has multiple broken bones. Lying amidst the squalor was another child of 18 months, named Mitchell, tethered to a table leg with a filthy diaper and a bottle of rancid milk.

As the story of Lisa’s “illegal” adoption unfolded – of a mother betrayed by her obstetrician and a baby handed to two drug addicts, perhaps in exchange for drugs…and the years of abuse suffered by Lisa….the media couldn’t get enough of the story. It was the OJ Simpson case of the 80’s.

I was entranced from the beginning. All I could think of was: but for the grace of God. I knew with all my heart and soul that that could have been my daughter or any of our children who had been relinquished. My heart broke thinking of every mother wondering…and most of all for the one who knew it was her daughter.

I was angered, and anger is a fire that burns in me igniting me into action. I saw in this tragedy the need to scream to the world: "See – this is what secretive, private, unregulated adoptions can lead to!" And so, together with Joe Soll of Adoption Crossroads in NYC, I (with Origins-NJ) initiated a candlelight vigil from Lisa’s home in Greenwhich Village, NY to her public elementary school. We got what we sought: lots of press and TV coverage.

Perhaps more importantly, on a homan scale, I was succesful (details revealed in my book, The Stork Market) in reuniting the boy, named Mitchell with his family. It is the most rewarding search and reunion of thousands I have helped accomplish.


Newspaper coverage of our candlelight vigil.

Right: My then six-year-old daughter at the candlelight vigil. She was the same age as Lisa.

Tomorrow: 1989
Adoption Activism takes to the streets of NYC and Washington DC

The Year Was 1981...

There is a need to retell some adoption reform history that was lost because it was re-Internet...and because I have been asked: "What were 'you people' doing for 30 years? Why are things still so bad or worse?"

As many now know...CUB formed in 1976 by Lee Campbell. This history is available at: The Adoption History Project and is worthwhile recommended reading.

In 1980I was one of five co-founders of the NJ based group Origins: An organization for mothers who had lost children to adoption. Though we were all memebrs and supporters of CUB, we saw adoption as a woman's issue. We were baby-boomers who had lost our children during in the prior decade — the 60's when we were teens and young adults. Our children were now barley teens themselves, some still in grade school and we were filled with overwhelming pain to know there well-being.
Adoptees were searching, but many of us could not wait until our children found us...hearing of the pain not knowing during early adolescence had caused them. Some of us had medical information we wanted very much to give to share. In addition, we heard too often of children who remained in foster care, lived in one parent homes as a result of divorce or death of one of their adoptive parents... were abused or died in infancy. We could not just sit around and wait to be found, and then have them ask: "Why didn't you ever try to find me?"
And so began what came to be known as "minor search." It was very controversial even within the search and support movement. And the concerns were well-funded: it brought heat on all underground search operations. In 1981 Lucy Pare, one of the founders of Origins-NJ was set up by adoptive parents pretending to be birth parents.
This led to a Grand Jury investigation into illegal search and major TV news coverage, including an investigative series on NBC "Whose Child is It?" with promos of children on swings being stalked, by those ready to snatch them away...and repeated images of Lucy receiving money in a school yard like a drug dealer.

Rather than take it lying down and defensively, Origins-NJ called our own press conference and went on the offense telling our — hitherto unknown — side of the story. Joining us at our press conference was attorney Harold Cassidy who had led the battle for Mary Beth Whiteheads and outlawed paid surrogacy in New Jersey.

Just as we seek to have our children the "times" in which we relinquished, we need to all be compassionate of those of us who dared to speak out not long after those same times that deemed us powerless and vulnerable to being pressure to relinquish...no matter what we called ourselves!
We called ourselves birthmothers with "in-your-face" stand-up- and-be-counted pride, just as some adoptees call themselves bastards! It was better than what we had been called - or being ignored and kept totally invisible as had been the case prior. We went public in all our local newspapers for all our neighbors to see because we felt it was importna tto show the world the face of a birthmother...that we were no longer frightened teenagers or crack whores!

The following is the statement I read at the press conference held by Origins, NJ 1981, quoted on NBC and PBS news:


We have chosen to be here in Princeton on this day and at this time because we believe a Grand Jury investigation is about to commence here in the Criminal Justice building as a result of an investigation by the Attorney General's office. ORIGINS believes this investigation to be ill conceived and ill advised. We believe that the Attorney General's Office might make better use of their resources to investigate the inequities of the adoption system and to question whether the system really serves to solve any problems or simply creates new ones. The Attorney General's Office seems only to care that a law MAY have been broken, not about WHY it may have been broken. We hope to explain why at this press conference.
Adoption was originally created to find families for homeless orphans. It has changed over the years to meet the demands of childless married couples who can afford to pay thousands of dollars for healthy infants. ORIGINS believes that both private and public funds that are currently being spent to separate mothers and children sbould be spent instead in trying to find ways to protect and preserve this most precious unit: a mother and her child.
ORIGINS is a nationwide organization for women who have lost children to adoption. We were founded in order to recognize the unique emotional needs of birthmothers and to help them deal with their continuing guilt, anguish and concern for their lost children.
We surrendered our children not because they were unwanted or unloved, but because adoption was presented to us as the ONLY "loving I mature" option a single mother could take. Contrary to popular belief, the majority of birthmothers are neither "bag ladies or princesses" as many adoptees fantasize and the media would oft times have you believe. Rather, we are real, live human beings. We are the lady next door with all the kids, the executive, or your child's first grade school teacher. We did not abuse or abandon our children. We gave up our children as an act of love, believing that we could not provide an adequate home for them at that time and because we were pressured by family, social workers I clergy and society's mores.
Those of us who have continued to love and have concern for our lost children are tired of being presented as women living in shadows who desire protection and anonymity. We are all here today to show the world that we care more about the welfare of our children than our own protection and personal. safety. Those of us who care, likewise resent being presented as selfish threats to our children and their families if we wish to seek them.
While contact by the birthmother can be upsetting to adoptive parents, if such contacts are both made and received in a spirit of forgiveness, love and sensitivity they can present an opportunity for growth for all parties involved. Adoptive parents who are willing to communicate with birthmothers can further cement the loving connections they have established with their children by presenting them with the knowledge of their heritage. Nothing destroy a family built of trust, honesty and love. Birthparents recognize the adoptive parents as the "real" parents in every sense of the word. We are not seeking to regain custody of our children. To our knowledge, there has never been a reported case of a missing child in which a birthparent was even suspected, as has been suggested by notorious media reports such as the recent NBC news coverage of this case.
Birthparents who institute the search process are not intruding into the lives of their children and their families for selfish needs, but rather are making themselves available to alleviate the adoptees' inevitable fear of rejection. We do not regard our children as "property" to be stolen, fought over or owned. Nothing would be more tragic than birthmothers and adoptive parents to be at war with one another, when in fact we share the most precious bond—love and concern for the same child.
There are bad laws and good laws. In a free society, laws are what the people make them. ORIGINS believes that the laws surrounding adoption and sealed records are based on fear and ignorance. It is important to understand WHY people might choose to break bad laws in order to decide how and why the laws should be changed. As long as there are sealed records, adoptees and birthparents will use alternative methods to search for one another.
We believe it is UNCONSCIONABLE to deny ANY child access to his origins, and to ANY mother the right to confirm the well being of her surrendered child.
We admire and support courageous people like Lucy Pare for acting out of moral conviction. For us to face the injustices of adoption takes courage and causes pain to ourselves, but it is the only way to heal the wounds adoption has caused.

The following is the statement read by Harold Cassidy, attorney for Origins-NJ:

There is a need for US in society to learn to know the women who have come to call themselves "birthparents." They are women who know that a child is a part of his mother forever. They are women who know that separation can never sever the bond between them. They know what it means to love a child and to place the child's welfare above all else in life. They know the pain of wanting what is best for the child they love while society tells them that what is best is that they never see that child again. They know the ultimate act of love. They know the ultimate sacrifice. They know the neverending grief of being continually denied what every portion of their souls demands: the knowledge that their children are well.
We. as a society have perpetrated the cruelest deception. What we have believed to be altruistic has been, in reality, destructive. We have sought to create without any understanding of hew much we destroy in the process.
Birthparents now know that separating a mother and her child is not in the best interests of either of them. Their enormous sacrifice was based on society 's misconceptions. The adoptees' sense of rejection is the most painful irony of all: what was done out of love is mistaken for a lack of it.
For us to truly learn what a birthparent is, is to learn that we as a society are hypocritical. We urge surrender, then later rebuke it. We make laws that we purport to be for the welfare of our children, then ignore or suppress their pleas to satisfy the most fundamental and compelling need they have: to know their mothers.
What we must understand is that we have held imprisoned an important part of these women. They must be made whole again. This task will not be difficult when we understand who they are.
They are our mothers.
They are our sisters.
They are our daughters.
We have made them a sacrificed minority. We must have the courage to learn to know them and the pain that has been inflicted upon them. When we achieve this, we shall know that they act out of love, and we needn't fear them.
------------------

Tomorrow - History Lesson Part II: 1987 and the NYC candlelight vigil for Little Lisa.

OWNK

Please click image to see it enlarged!

The image is of a collage I put together after copying surrender papers received through The BirthparentProject.org. All names are appropriately blacked out and this was a side project and did not use the original papers submitted - which were submitted for the goal of sharing with legislators to prove that one of our papers ever promised us anonymity. The BirthParentProject is alive and well and has had over 500 respondents to date and i am seeking a statistician to help analyze the results for publication.



Reading through these papers is quite enlightening. I have yet to find any promises made to us in exchange for our rights to ur children...only terms such as agreeing to "never interfere" in the lives of our children.

On our collective surrender papers - ranging from 1965 to 1990 - contain are phrases like "Out-of-Wedlock" "Unwed" and "Not Married; Never Married" making it perfectly clear the importance that legal status held for us in terms of acceptance or not of our being parents. In all of the papers mothers are mothers, while fathers are often "alleged" fathers. An interesting differences, again reflecting the patriarchal marriage law basis that in marriage, there is is never a question, but rather and assumption, that the mother's husband is the father - a situation being changed currently by DNA.

Wording of our "papers" — for those of us fortunate enough to have been given or been able to obtain copies — vary not just over time but also locale, as each state has its own laws and way of wording the relinquishment and consent to adopt. Most contained legal assurances that we "understood" what we were doing, which is in retrospect as accurate as a POW signing a confession of war crimes. How/why would any mother say that in recognition of her single status that she "willingly" preferred to turn her child over to the state or agency to do what it might with her child, "including, but not limited to adoption"? No sane, able mother would ever willingly have done such a thing had any of us truly understand that was what we were in fact signing and had any of us been given any other alternative.

Also interesting is that most recent papers in my possession, from 1990, identify the mother of the child as the "natural mother." Perhaps some pressure to separate her more with language, with an identifying adjective? One can just imagine the discussions that led to the compromise of "natural mother" - with some favoring birthmother or worse on those papers.

Please continue to spread the word about the BirthParentProject survey and encourage mothers to send me their papers!

While I have not seen it but hope to, I am told that one mother has hospital records stamped "OWNK: Out-of-Wedlock; Not-Keeping." I couldn't help thinking how convenient it was of them to come up with an acronym that sound like OINK...the sound of a PIG: Pregnant Indigent Girl. Of course, OWNK also stands for OWN Kid! As such, I think it's a name we should embrace, like adoptees embrace their bastardhood!

Power to the OWNKS!





Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Sodomizing Adoptive Parent of the Year!

In the 1990s Jerry Wayne Love and his wife were named as adoptive parents of the year by the Madison County Department of Human of Resources.

Love, 51, is a minister but is not ordained by any church or religious group. He pleaded guilty in a plea deal Monday to three felony charges of first-degree sodomy in the repeated sexual abuse of three children he and his wife adopted. The boys are now are 13, 14 and 16. All three accused him.

Alabama Circuit Judge Karen Hall sentenced Jerry Wayne Love to 15 years on each charge to be served one after the other. If he had been convicted by a jury, Love could have been sentenced up to life in prison on nine of the felony charges. But she accepted prosecutors' recommendation and ordered Love to spend five years on probation and undergo treatment in a sex-offender program. In exchange, the prosecution dropped 10 counts of sodomy and three counts of sexual abuse against Love. The plea agreement spared the boys from having to testify.

The man ironically named "Love" must complete a sex-offender counseling program. He also must register as a sex offender under the community notification law.

No word of custody of the children.

Boycott Yielding Results!

No, the pro-adoption, pro-marketing adoption to "birthparents" website being boycotted is not folding and probably not likely to. Nor are their advertisers.

But there are baby steps I am happy to report.

Concerned United Birthparents (CUB) apparently received an untold number of "inquiries" as a result of "a question that Mirah Riben posed on her blog" regarding the boycott and the fact that CUB's VP and another board member were paid bloggers on that site. So troubling were these "inquiries" that CUB president, Margy McMorrow felt the need to address and defend them in the long-awaited issue of their newsletter, the Communicator, which became available on July 12, 2007.

The defense stated: "Our words need to be heard by those who are adopting today, those are the people who most need to hear what we have to say. They need to hear our truth, what we have personally experienced in the world of adoption....Change will not occur if we only talk to each other. Keeping it among ourselves isn't the answer. We need to reach out to people who disagree, who haven't a clue about the birthparent experience and that of our children. The messages of Jan and Heather are consistent with CUB's views. We support their activism."

First, I want to thank those who read here and raised the issues with CUB. Collectively our voices were heard!

Unfortunately, Margy did not check with the prime players before releasing this newsletter on 7/12/07 claiming that Jan and Heather were blogging there for higher motivation.

Just four days later - today - July 16, 2007, according to Jan Baker: "Heather is no longer blogging at" that site. Jan apparently "also resigned a few days ago and will blog till the end of the month." Jan is very clear to point out that neither of them left as a result of my raising the issue of conflict of interest. Both Heather and Jan have said that it was a lot of hard work producing the amount required and the pay very low.

I can understand that. While I have no quotas, I - and many others of us - do what we do for free...because we are doing what we believe in. Seems whatever higher values their blogging was intended to achieve was not worth their effort in the end in terms of time versus dollars and cents.

And so, while no one is willing to connect any dots...seems I raised an issue that caused CUB to feel a need to defend its actions, and lo and behold those who once blogged for blood-sucking baby brokers, claiming noble reasons for doing so, are no longer!

I call that a minor success no matter how its couched, and no matter what the stated reasons. Less $$ for the bad guys!

It is often hard to make choices. Sometimes good comes wrapped in evil and vice versa. Sometimes it is hard to step back and seethe bigger picture. In this case, is the good being done in reaching those who might an article placed on that site as opposed to elsewhere worth lining the pockets of baby brokers?

When we seek to decipher what seems a quagmire -- I use a simple rule of thiumb: follow the money! When is a noble cause not so noble, despite all of the protetstations and rationales to the contrary? Whenever money is involved!

I could easily accept advertising from Google on this blog and make a little cash. yes, i know it would likely "how-to-steal-a-baby- sites that would advertise, but according Margy McMorrow's logic, that might introduce "others" to this point of view. I prefer to keep the lines firm between them and us. ad not be an Uncle Tom, supporting those who profit from mothers' losses.

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