Blood Ties

Anyone who questions the importance of blood ties and paternity ought to take a day off, stay home and watch daytime TV.

No, not the soaps. Watch Divorce Court, and other Judge shows, or the Maurey Povich Show. There is no end to the steady stream of couples coming on the show to get DNA testing to verify paternity of chidlren.

Two general themes are this:

I. Men who do not beleive a child born to their girlfreind or wife during their marriage or relationship is theirs. Most often their reason for doubting paternity more than anything else (such as suspicions of infidelty) is their concern that the baby doesn't look like them.

II. Women who want to prove - or find out - who is the father of their child. In these cases, many of the women admit not being sure. Others say they are 100% positive but need to prove it.

Interesting, is:

• The ignorance that a baby may not look like his father, especially immediately after birth.
• Strong denial of the POSSIBILITY of paternity despite admitting to having had unprotected sex with the baby's mother.
  
• The vast majority of the young men, if they are already acting the role of father to the child or chidlren, say that they will continue in that role even if proven not be the biological father.
• The infidelity and lack of trust seems irrelevant to thse couple. The only conern is biological connection. Many men based their decision to remain in the relationship with the mother on that one fact alone - even those who want to continue to have a relationship with the child.

Overall, it is amazing eye-opener about the importance placed on genetic parentage.

Incredibly Hysterical!!

Indiana House Bill 1113 2008 Regular Session

DIGEST OF HB1113 (Updated January 9, 2008 4:48 pm - DI 69)

Birth certificate fraud. Increases from a Class A misdemeanor to a Class D felony the penalty for: (1) making a false or fraudulent statement when applying for a birth certificate or when applying for permission to inspect birth records; (2) altering, counterfeiting, or mutilating a certified copy of a birth certificate; or (3) using an altered, counterfeit, or mutilated copy of a birth certificate.

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

I for one sure hope this passes! Won't it be fun to sue the state for committing fraud and violating its own statute?

Redefining Kinship?

Can words just be redefined to suit special interest groups?

More importantly, is nothing scared?


The AAC 29th Annual Conference, March 26-29, 2008 in Portland, is entitled--
Adoption in the Global Community: Redefining Kinship in the 21st Century

After reading this, I went to my trusty online dictionary to see if there was wiggle room in the word "kinship" which has always meant blood ties to me. This is what I found:

I. Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
kin·ship /ˈkɪnʃɪp/
–noun
1. the state or fact of being of kin; family relationship.
2. relationship by nature, qualities, etc.; affinity.

II. American Heritage Dictionary
kin·ship (kĭn'shĭp')
n.

1. Connection by blood, marriage, or adoption; family relationship.
2. Relationship by nature or character; affinity.

II. American Heritage New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition
kinship

A relation between two or more persons that is based on common ancestry (descent) or marriage (affinity).

Nothing ambiguous at all...until the very last selection...one out of four:

IV. American Heritage Stedman's Medical Dictionary
kin·ship (knshp)
n.

Connection by blood, marriage, or adoption; family relationship.

And so, I ask once again...in the world of newspeak is nothing scared?

We have already changed the meaning of "mother" twisting inside out and to call the one in who's womb someone grows a surrogate when the word surrogate means substitute, as in one who would raise the child of another. We call expectant mothers "birthmothers' [gag!] and prospective adopters "Moms-to-be" [ugh1].

What next? Will we "redefine" blood? Heritage? Origins?

Surrender Survey

For Immediate Release Jan. 16, 2008

PLEASE SPREAD VIA EMAIL LISTS AND BLOGS!!

The Surrender Survey http://www.questionpro.com/akira/TakeSurvey?id=844922 is for parents who has lost a child to adoption. The survey takes approximately 15 minutes to complete. Your name and other identifying information is optional and if given will remain confidential and be used only to verify information.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this survey is to apprise the long term effects and attitudes of mothers (and fathers) who have lost children to adoption, particularly in terms of any “promises” or expectations of confidentiality. Accurate data regarding attitudes, perceptions, beliefs and practices affecting parents in these situations is vital in formulating upcoming legislation in areas of family preservation, foster care and adoption. We hope this survey will be the most comprehensive study of parents who surrendered parental rights or whose rights were terminated resulting in their children being either adopted or remaining in foster care. Your cooperation – regardless of any previous such surveys you may or may not have participated in – is highly appreciated.

This surveys replaces the “BirthParent Project” which, though it had 600 respondents, was found to contain some technical difficulties upon analysis of the results. Further, this survey will be advertised in newspapers in order to solicit responses from parents who lost children in the “public”, in order to reduce the limitations of relying on a select audience.

Please take the survey ONCE for EACH child you have either relinquished or have had your rights terminated for.

Our goal is to have 600 OR MORE parents take this survey before December 1, 2008. This survey is limited to American adoption practices therefore you need to reside in the U.S. If you take this survey and know of any other parents who have either relinquished or had their rights terminated and can take this survey; PLEASE spread the word.

Please go to the link below and take the survey and thank you in advance for your cooperation:

http://www.questionpro.com/akira/TakeSurvey?id=844922

Educating Adolescents

A new Texas state law requires that parenting and paternity awareness be included in the high school health curriculum by 2008-09.


"We saw that taking a preventive role would be very important," said Janece Rolfe, a spokeswoman with the attorney general's office. "We think it's certainly never too early for children to understand this."

So...what is it they will be learning: parenting or preventing parenting?

And, no mention at all about infertility anywhere in the curriculum. Concerns are mentioned about "children having children" but not about waiting until you're too old to have children. And what about the lifelong PAIN of loosing a child to adopting? Think THAT will be anywhere in the curriculum?

If you live in the lone star state, you may want to check this out. It might open the door of opportunity for speakers to address these classes.

Proposed Anti-Family Legislation

110th CONGRESS1st SessionH. CON. RES. 239

Recognizing and honoring birthparents who carry out an adoption plan.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

October 18, 2007

Mrs. SCHMIDT (for herself, Mr. OBERSTAR, and Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor

---

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Recognizing and honoring birthparents who carry out an adoption plan.

Whereas once a pregnant woman and the man involved in the pregnancy (the birthparents) decide that they are unable to parent a child, carrying out an adoption plan is highly admirable;

Whereas for the birthparents, carrying out an adoption plan can be an expression of great love for the child and can be what it means to be the best parent possible;

Whereas birthparents who decide to carry out an adoption plan come from all walks of life, with various backgrounds and socioeconomic status;

Whereas in 2002 (the most recent year for which such statistics are available), there were 22,291 domestic infant adoptions in the United States;

Whereas birthparents should be recognized, honored, and commended for making a loving decision to carry out an adoption plan; and

Whereas Congress should endeavor to do more to support birthparents who carry out an adoption plan: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That Congress recognizes and honors birthparents who carry out an adoption plan.

________________________________________________


Origins-USA opposes this proposed anti-family legislation.



Because it speaks about pregnancy, this bill is obviously and specifically aimed at increasing infant adoptions in direct disregard for the children - more than 100,00 - in foster care who have no families they can ever return to...whose parents right (rightly or wrongly) have already been permanently terminated.



The loss of one's child and the deconstruction of a family -- other than for the protection ans safety of a child in danger of harm -- is not honorable, nor commendable. Rather, it represents a failure on the part of our society to properly provide resources for families in crisis to remain together.



This proposal to "honor" mothers and fathers attempts to make noble a last resort, a desperate act most often made because of lack of options, or having been pressured or coerced....and an act that results in the most painful lifelong loss and feelings of guilt and shame for the parents, and lifelong feelings of rejection, abandonment and permanent disconnect of heritage and truth for the child...regardless of how well-meaning and caring his adopters may be.



The bill itself employs coercive tactics and language. It follows well the advise of the National Council for Adoption (NCFA) as spelled out in their recently released slick propaganda campaign "Birthmother/Good Mother." The NCFA's sole job it is to increase a steady flow of "merchandise" for its member adoption agencies to redistribute for fees that keep them profitable as businesses, and/or provide salaries for directors and staff of so-called non-profit adoption agencies.


Adoption is the result of a tragedy for parents and most of all for a child. It is not to be encouraged with platitudes but instead those concerned about families and child welfare should be seeking ways to prevent the unnecessary separation of mothers and their children.

,br.Our "honor" and platitude should go instead to those brave women who are able to fight the system and the pressures and who, against all odds ands without adequate child care and other resources, manage to keep their struggling families intact!

Write to Congresswoman Schmidt!

Write letters to the editor of your newspaper.

How Many Things Can You Find Wrong with This?

As I began reading "The baby I turned away" by Jessica Berger Gross I thought it was SATIRE!

Jessica tells her miscarriage and continued attempts to become pregnant, and finally her conclsuion to adopt because of her "need" of a baby....but not an open adoption, because she "couldn't handle" "ongoing contact with my child's birth mother." (Is it becoming obvious why I thought this was a put on?).

So she scans the other sources and decides on India because she had long "romanticized about the country and because she did YOGA! (I am NOT making this up!) She begins to fantasize about going to pick up her new daughter while she'd be "dressed in an Indian blouse and worn leather sandals." She decides that she and her husband are "better people for having chosen adoption"! Chose? After not wanting to, but being unsuccessful at fertility treatments. And this "better person" talked herself out reading anything "more critical" or "complicated" about adoption!

In an expensive restaurant in India she thinks about the "ethical issues surrounding international adoption: the extreme poverty that causes girls and women to give up their babies and the global inequalities that lead those babies to homes overseas" and amits knowing that they were to "benefit from an unwed mother's impossible choice."

Her PRIME concern, however: "that we'd be matched with a child who wouldn't strike me as adorable. " That was because they had checked all the boxes and been assured that the child they were traveling to meet and take home was assured to be healthy.

As the title of the article reveals, the child, though adorable, did meet her requirments and was left in the orphanage that has already left the child manurished with failure to thrive. Probably better than having been taken here and then dumped in foster care or abused, for not meeting expectations.

But no need to cry for Jessica...she's now pregnant.

One can only hope for the sake of her unborn child that it is adorable, perfect, and perfectly healthy -- lest it too be rejected. Or is blood really thicker than water and are we made more accepting by our maternal hormaones and biological connectedness???

And when and why has it become fashionable for people like this to admit such a gross act publicly and seek pity, or even understanding?