Adoption Issues and Family Matters
how infant adoption tears real families apart

<< May 2005 >>
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
08 09 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31

Adoption Blog

Adoption is complex both psychologically and sociologically. Adoption is practiced in some cultures and not in others - what motivates some cultures to transfer babies from one family to another?

adoption

How do those in power utilize "Positive Adoption Language" to create a "culture of adoption" in order to influence families to surrender their own children and grandchildren? How did so many people become infertile and how are those in the business of adoption and reproductive technologies exploiting their infertility? Are mothers being used as if they were only a source of babies for adoption, a kind of human breeding-machine? How do family members fare, after being separated for adoption? How do families with open adoptions fare? This adoption blog will address these questions and more.


adoption







adoption

Favorite Websites:

Adoption vs. Abortion Myths

Adoption vs. Parenting

Adoption Quotes

Adoption Psychology

Adoption Health Risks, consequences

Open Adoption Effects on Natural Family

Open Adoption Risks

Is Open Adoption or Closed Adoption Right for Me?

Adoption Australia

Dear Birthmother - Is Adoption Worth the Grief?

Parenting Resources or Adoption

Keeping My Baby

Mothers Exploited By Adoption

Adoption Origins, Inc. NSW Australia

Adoption Origins South Australia

Adoption Origins Canada

Adoption OriginsUSA

Adoption AdoptionCrossroads.org

Adoption Iowa Adoption Support Groups

Adoption Adoption Truth

Adoption Adopting Back Our Children

Crisis Pregnancy

Unplanned Pregnancy

Adoption Statistics

Birthmothers Day

Dear Birthmother

Dear Birthmother

Open Adoption

Open Adoption

Maternity Homes

Unwed Mothers

Thought Reform

Respectful Adoption Language

Unwed Daughter Pregnant

Adoption Reform

Dear Birthmother

Respectful Adoption Language

Adoption Stories

Birthmother Stories

Unwed Mothers

Dear BirthMother

Domestic Adoption Baby Boom

Adoption -Opposed to "Right to Adopt"

Adoption Language Devalues Natural Family

Adoption Agencies or Baby Broker?

  • Dear Birthmother


  • Angels in Adoption

    Adoption Artwork Fantastic Paintings and Sculpture - Vicki Ayres


    Adoption Artwork Fantastic Paintings - Lina Eve


    Adoptees Stephen Fitzpatrick - Classical Musician, Harpist



    adoption


    Adoption Press

    If you want to be updated on this weblog Enter your email here:



    rss feed



    May 18, 2005
    Adoption - Single Fathers "Choice"?

    Dear Birthmother letters, Dear Birthmom, Dear Birthparent, Dear Birth mother, Dear Birthfather - without these ugly demeaning "birth" words or words like "unwed" mother or "unwed" father used on a website no naive pregnant mother, father or grandparent-to-be will even find the page.   And what self-respecting person wants to use such language as "Dear Birthmother" when everyone knows it is wrong to disrespect the parents of a child?  By contrast, would you call a pregnant woman who is married a "birthmother birth object"?  Now, I'll get to the point:

    Adoption - Single Father's "Choice"?

    There are men who complain that if their wife or girfriend gets an abortion, they did not get a "choice" about what was to happen to their potential offspring.  But what about when their offspring - their own precious son or daughter - is actually born?  A father MUST have rights and responsiblities as the parent of his born child.  If a mother keeps her baby, then the baby's  father is expected to take responsibility - and the father is liable for child support.   A father cannot "choose" adoption without the mother's consent.

    But what if their baby's mother surrenders her parental rights?   If the father is not married to his child's mother then he often gets no choice whatsoever.  Yet, if he is married to his child's mother and she surrenders her parental rights, he still retains his.

    In United States, we are supposed to have "equal protection" under the law - with no discrimination based on race, sex, creed - or marital state.  Is there "equal protection" under the law where adoption is concerned? 

    Adoption makes a mockery of single parents - both mothers and fathers - making them out to be a big nothing.  The United States Constitution provides for "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness".  But with adoption, a single parent's constitutional liberty rights to the care, custody and control of his own child are all ignored.  These rights are supposed to be "inalienable" rights - like the right to your own vital body parts, rights that cannot be surrendered. 

    Getting fathers "out of the way" - ignoring their parental rights - is necessary element in getting babies for adoption.   How many "Dear Birthfather"  letters do you see out there?  While single mothers are viewed as birth-incubator-things - meant to be used as the source of a baby for adopters - it is assumed a father does not even exist.  Sometimes the fathers are "permitted" ("encouraged" is a better word for it)  to sign away any rights they might have had before their baby is even born.  But how can a father know what it is he is signing away when he has not even held his baby in his arms?   With adoption, there is a horrendous denial of a father's Constitutional rights.

    Adoption is a human rights violation as well.  Association with family is a human right.  A father's child IS his family member - one of the closest family members he will ever have, as close to him as his own mother and father.

    There are fathers who have been serving their country in Iraq - and return home to find their own infant  son or daughter has been taken for adoption.  The  freedoms of American citizens - freedoms they thought they were protecting - have been cruelly denied these men.  And while the mother at least got to hold her baby (we hope)  - pressured though she was she had the opportunity to have some small clue of was she was "giving up".  It is surely unethical - and illegal - to pressure or influence a mother to sign away her parental rights.  Yet not only do adoption agencies and adoption attorneys like to tell the mother she will be "disappointing" adopters if she keeps her own baby, but often the adopters themselves are there in the hospital, putting even more pressure on the mother, reminding her they have already got a room all set up - and she does not.   Does the hospital - or anyone - have a car seat and a baby outfit they could loan her until she gets to the store?  If so, she will not be advised of it.   Sometimes the greatest pressure is exerted by a mother's own parents - and the "professionals" whose business is to get babies for adopters - merely take advantage of the situation.  Some "professionals" encourage parents to pressure their daughters into surrendering parental rights.  Later these "professionals"  will claim they were only giving the mother an "option" and did not "force" her to sign anything.

    Still a father might easily argue that at LEAST the mother had this one small opportunity to hold her child, to come to her senses and just take her son or daughter home.  Yet, even when the father did not get this one moment, still his infant son or daughter - a valuable commodity - was taken for adoption.   

    A father can contest the adoption - and what do you suppose the outcome will be?   The adopters will claim the child would be horribly traumatized by his own father.  If a married father returns from the war after a period away - or never having met his child - then will his son or daughter be horribly traumatized if he pushes him on a swing at the park or calls himself "daddy"?  Would an uncle or neighbor who has been with the child all along have the "right" to tell the child's own father he is not wanted?

    Surely that would be a nasty thing to do - not a loving thing at all.  But then adoption is not about love.  Adoption is about obtaining babies for people - people who have the money to pay for "adoption services" - services designed to get babies for adopters. 


    Dear Birthmother letters, Dear Birthmom, Dear Birth parent, Dear Birth mother, Dear Birthfather - without these ugly demeaning "birth" words used on a website no naive mother, father or grandparent will even find the page.   And what self-respecting person wants to use such language as "Dear Birthmother" when everyone knows it is wrong to disrespect the parents of a child? 


    Posted at 08:16 am by warriorwoman
    Make a comment  

    May 17, 2005
    The Barren Womb - Exploiting Infertility

    The Barren Womb - Exploiting Infertility

    "The barren womb cannot be satisfied."  The Bible says so and many people in the business of adoption and reproductive technologies in the United States know it as well.  "Professionals" and scientists are exploiting this infertility crisis and profiting off the suffering of the infertile.  They are also causing suffering for naive or vulnerable women used as womb-objects and for artificially-created "orphans".  The United States may be one of the top nations in the world in allowing unethical practices like payments for human sperm and eggs, payments for womb rentals and more.  People are lured in to "donating" by telling them they will be "angels" for aiding the infertile .  This "angel" talk deflects attention from the truth - that they will be "donating" their sons and daughters. 

    Surely a
    compassionate response to the growing infertility crisis would be to educate people how to have babies while they are still able.  The compassionate response of doctors and health professionals in the United States would be to prevent infertility and the suffering of infertility. Yet while there are programs focused on educating people to delay pregnancy, therre is little to educate the public on why not to delay pregnancy, why not to donate your eggs, why not to donate your embryos, and why to keep the unexpected babies born to you. 

    Medical News - Half those delaying pregnancy leave it too late, UK 01 Oct 2004 "Half of all women who put off trying for a baby until their 30s will fail to have a child, a new survey claims... women tend to overestimate how many childbearing years they have left and experts are now calling for sex education in schools to discuss how to get pregnant in adulthood.

    Infertility problems are not fun - and treatments are costly as well. But with all the money to be made from infertility treatments, medical professionals neglect to promote ways to prevent infertility. These professionals are letting people down, not serving the public in the best way possible. There have been reports of "reproductive tourism" to the United States from other countries.  There have been reports that a human egg has sold by brokers for as much as $40,000 and a mother to incubate her own child (as a so-called "surrogate") has "sold" for $170,000. The "markup" must be good.  According to some websites, the egg donor (natural mother) gets $5,000 for multiple eggs extracted per  "donation".   Not only may the treatments utilized to obtain multiple eggs affect the "donor's" health but women have a limited supply of eggs.  So when multiple eggs are extracted it means the "donor" will experience an earlier onset of infertility themselves.  And - even though the "child" may relate to her infertile buyers "need" to buy her -  for the child being raised in a situation where she is cut off from all - or half of - her natural family, it is not an ideal situation.

    It's a shame people don't know more of the suffering of
    women who have been used as the source of babies for adoption - and what an adoptee might experience.  Now naive women are making babies on purpose for their friends, startled to find afterwards how incredibly painful it is to lose your child to adoption.

    It's time the professionals are honest with people and work to prevent an infertility crisis.

    The Surgeon General is calling for open records for adoptees - I hope  the Surgeon General will also insist on some regulations preventing solicitation for a for a man or woman's child or potential children.

    Association with - and knowledge of - your natural family is not only a good idea for medical reasons - it is a human right.  It is a human right for  parents and siblings too - not just the adopted or artificially-created person. 

    Read about open adoption to see how things might be for those parents and siblings: Article on open adoption.  Read also about closed adoption.


    "The barren womb cannot be satisfied."  But education about infertility prevention - and stopping the unethical practices to get people unrelated babies to use "as if" they were their own - might prevent much future suffering.



    Posted at 10:49 am by warriorwoman
    Make a comment  

    May 16, 2005
    "Birthmother" Birth Objects

    "Birthmother" Birth Objects


    In earlier decades, a single mother was derisively referred to as  an "unwed" mother - as if she were somehow lacking as a mother.  Then her baby was removed from her - forcibly or though cunning methods - for adoption.  Almost no mother in the 60's who was single at the time her baby was born got to raise her own child. 

    "Unwed" is not used as much anymore.  Taking it's place is the word "
    birthmother"  and other "birth" words like "birthmoms", "birthmothers", "birthparents", "bmom", "lifemother" and "lifemothers".  The word "birthmother" is used to target vulnerable mothers as the source of babies for adoption.  When the term "birthmother" is used it makes it seem as though mothers are not mothers, but just some sort of object that gives birth: a "birth servant' or "birth slave" making babies for rich people to buy.  Even fathers may be derisively called "birthfathers" ("birth fathers"). While the customers of "adoption services"  call themselves "real parents", the true real parents  and other family members are demoted to objects.  

    To get more
    babies for adoption, the importance of real relatedness is being diminished.  A single mother is her child's mother, no less than any other mother. A child's father is her father.  Her ancestors are her ancestors. 

    It used to be that when a mother's child was born, he was her son or she was her daughter.  But now some people believe there is such a thing as a "
    birthson" or "birthdaughter" - and even "birth grandparents".  When raised together, siblings are "siblings" but if raised apart they suddenly become unrelated "birth siblings"?  This makes no sense.

    Some people say that a "
    birthmother" is a mother.  If that's true, why not just write "Dear Mother" Letters requesting a mother's child?  Instead we have "Dear Birthmother", "Dear Birthmom", "Dear Birthparent" - and even "Dear Genetic Parent".  ("Dear Genetic Parent" Letters are used to solicit frozen human embryos for adoption.  Parents are asked to "donate" their potential offspring as if their sons and daughters were only some old clothes.) 

    Some people talk about "
    respect for a birthmother".  Hello!  You don't "respect" someone by calling them a "birthmother" birth object.  It would be respectful to acknowledge a mother as the mother of her child.  Some people want to honor women as birth objects on "Birthmothers Day".  If the real point is to help people understand the horror of using a mother for adoption, then why not have a Cindy Jordan Day of Remembrance

    Want a baby to adopt?   To get babies, the word "unwed" is not used as much anymore.  Taking it's place is the word "birthmother"  and other "birth" words like "birthmoms", "birthmothers", "birthparents", "bmom", "lifemother" and "lifemothers".  The word "birthmother" is used to target single mothers as the source of babies for adoption

    Are you pregnant and need help with an unexpected
    "crisis" pregnancy?  A Mother's Song:  Unplanned pregnancy - without "crisis".

    Posted at 09:20 am by warriorwoman
    Make a comment  

    May 15, 2005
    Adoption Statistics

    Adoption Statistics


    Adoption Statistics are surprisingly hard to find.  And I don't mean just the number of people who were adopted per year or the numbers of moms whose infant sons and daughters were adopted-out.   

    Where statistics on the effects of adoption are concerned, there are lots of myths and rumors and misquoted studies.  But honestly-reported statistics on the effects of adoption on natural families and the adopted-out person are hard to find. 

    A comparison of outcomes for moms who kept their babies compared to moms whose babies were adopted-out would be interesting - including telling factors like number of suicides.  Should the government be encouraging single parents to surrender their babies? 

    Most mothers whose babies get adopted-out are not young teenagers.  According to information provided by the National Adoption Information Clearinghouse  these moms are between 17 and 24. Most are from a higher socioeconomic background from intact families. (Families who are naive about adoption?)

    Despite all the effort put into getting babies for adoption, about 97% of single mothers keep their babies.


    Motherhood Lessens Teen Delinquency?   

    A recent study  on unplanned pregnancy outcomes performed by Esther I. Wilder, Ph.D., of Lehman College and the Graduate Center of the City University of New York and her colleagues Trina Hope, Ph.D., of the University of Oklahoma and Toni Terling Watt, Ph.D., of Texas State University provides interesting insights.

    The study drew information from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, a nationwide survey of 19,000 teenagers in grades seven through 12. According to a Health Behavior News Service report by Aaron Levin, the findings were that of the 6,877 girls who got pregnant, the highest rates of juvenile delinquency were found among girls who had abortions or gave babies up for adoption. Girls who kept their babies were no more likely to be delinquent that those who had never gotten pregnant. Although before pregnancy, they smoked or used marijuana more than the girls who never got pregnant, girls who kept their babies were especially likely to quit smoking and to stop using marijuana.

    Thats just one study.  But it does make sense that moms would be likely to experience some growth in maturity when they keep their babies. 


    Sometimes rather than statistics, it's interesting to see what moms have to say after their babies have been taken from them (if ever so cunningly) to be used for adoption.   Maybe it's because they are called "birthmother birthmom birth objects"  that few people bother to ask the mothers' opinions on adoption


    Adoption Statistics are surprisingly hard to find. Perhaps honest adoption statistics would be too revealing...after all there is a large market for babies for adoption.



    Posted at 01:02 pm by warriorwoman
    Make a comment  

    May 14, 2005
    Adoption Miracles, Adoption Magic

    Adoption Miracles, Adoption Magic

    "Was it luck? Maybe. Was it fate? Possibly. Was it a miracle?"

    Thus states a website on adoption. But is adoption really the result of "miracles"?

    Whether you view adoption as "un petit miracle" or  "a modern-day miracle"  or "our little miracle sent straight from heaven" there is one thing you should know:  Adoption is not magicAdoption agencies and adoption lawyers are not wizards.  It takes measures like federally-funded Infant Adoption Awareness Training, Choose Life License Plates, limiting a woman's "choices" to ONLY adoption or abortion - and more - to get those babies for adoption.  "Adoption professionals"  get those babies from real families, convert them to "orphans" (on paper) and then sell them (via payments disguised as "adoption services") to unrelated people. Before the bill is paid in full, the buyers magically become "real parents". 

    When people want babies badly enough, thinking of God's blessing to a baby's family as God's gift TO THEM seems perfectly reasonable. Social workers assure people:  "God makes mistakes choosing parents"  -- and social workers are happy to fix God's errors.

    Wizard: Wise and friendly users of magic, applying their powers to help those who deserve it, and punish those who don't.   
    This is how adoption is viewed - helping those who "deserve" babies and punishing those who "don't".  Punishing moms for having babies, punishing the "little bastards" for being born.  "What!" you say - "We may punish the moms but we're not punishing the 'little bastards' - we love the 'little bastards."  But if people love the "little bastards" so much then why do they take their families away from them?    Aaaaahhhh ... the "little bastards" MUST have a family-ectomey prior to the "miracle" of adoption.  

    Adoption
    - isn't that where a child magically turns into the "descendant" of people who have purchased services designed to get them a baby?

    "Was it luck? Maybe. Was it fate? Possibly. Was it a miracle?"
    It is a true miracle - that the cruel man-made "institution of adoption" has lasted this long.   


    Posted at 09:01 pm by warriorwoman
    Make a comment  

    Open Adoption vs. Closed Adoption


    Open Adoption vs. Closed Adoption (vs. keeping natural families intact)


    Offering a vulnerable naive parent  only two "options" -  open adoption or closed adoption  -  may get more babies for adopters, but is it really right to limit  parents' choices?   

    "I read part of your unplanned pregnancy website and I agree that open adoption is bad,"  a woman wrote to me from a Pro-Life organization. 


    I found her comment interesting. Yes open adoption can mean intense suffering and the way that "open adoption" is used to lure pregnant moms into surrendering their babies  is horrendous.  But, presumably the woman who wrote to me still intends to separate families and collect donations and payments for "adoption services" (profitting off babies).  But she wants to do it in a way that the people who adopt won't have to know of the suffering of the moms (and sometimes dads, siblings and grandparents) they have used as baby-making machines.   Perhaps she missed the part about the effects of adoption on mothers and the effects of adoption on babies in closed adoptions?  Perhaps she missed this not-so-very-happy "adoption story" - just one of many closed adoption stories

    Surely there are adopters who were also naive - people hoping to find a baby to adopt, but not thinking about how babies have mothers, grandparents, siblings who will miss them.  The baby brokers (adoption agencies, adoption lawyers, adoption "counselors") surely aren't going to mention the techniques they use to get babies.  Instead they say the moms just aren't "ready to parent".  "Ready to parent"?  What is THAT phrase all about?   The moms ARE their child's parent - and so are the dads. 


    What are the techniques used to get babies for adoption
    First, advertise the "adoption option" until people truly believe that unrelated caregivers are preferable to a child's own family.

    Second, develop a lexicon to support this rediculous idea and call it "respectful adoption language".  ("Respectful"?  Their objective is to get babies, so of course they don't mention that the "adoption language" DISRESPECTS natural families.)

    Third, Infant Adoption Awareness Training (IAATP) to get a pregnant mom surrounded by people who will "think adoption". 

    Fourth,  Limit a woman's "choices" to adoption or abortion.  Get churches involved in separating families and call this activity "pro-life".   Get people chattering mindlessly about "human dignity" while they separate moms and babies and make grandmothers regret that they did not stop it in time. 

    Fifth, Choose Life License Plates - with proceeds going ONLY toward "adoption services" - services which are designed to get more babies for people to use "as if" they were born to them.   

    Sixth, Baby Safe Havens - again offering a scared mom no "option" other than baby abandonment .

    Seventh, get moms to believe they have already "choosen adoption" and encourage them to select prospective adopters long before they have a chance to think, before they have any way of knowing what they are choosing.  Ensure moms will feel beholden to the seemingly friendly prospective adopters and not want to disappoint them by keeping their own sons and daughters. 

    Eighth, ... 


    Obviously I could go on with this thought process for a long time...adding things like denying parents the information they would need to make an informed choice, denying fathers rights, denying a child's right to her own family.  Spreading rumors and generating myths that young mothers and  single mothers  are bad mothers.   Playing a game of "divide and conquer" pitting mothers and fathers against each other and grandparents against their pregnant daughter or son. 
    "Which is better - open adoption or closed adoption?" is a question that deflects from the real questions:  Considering the effects of adoption on natural families, why are parents' options being limited to only legalized baby abandonment?  Offering a vulnerable naive parent  only two optionsopen adoption or closed adoption  -  may get more babies for adopters, but separating families to get babies for adoption is a tragedy. 




    Posted at 12:37 pm by warriorwoman
    Make a comment  

    May 13, 2005
    Pro-Life Views, Assisted Suicide and Adoption

    Pro-Life Views - Comparing Assisted Suicide and Adoption 

    Pro-life proponents are generally opposed to assisted suicide. One argument made is that suicide assistance is usually requested by a patient out of desperation and is unlikely to be desired by a patient who receives adequate services, counseling and pain management. The pro-life view is that compassion for the dying demands that we provide services, rather than provide opportunities for ending life. Instead of assisted suicide, pro-lifers are in favor of providing humane services for all people - neither the morality of these people nor whether they have planned and are financially prepared for an expensive elongated illness is a consideration.

    Many people, especially in a society like that of the United States where profit often trumps humanity, may come to the conclusion that those who cannot care for themselves should be neglected or made to feel like a tremendous burden so they will “choose” suicide. A person who "chooses" suicide may even be lured by the incentive that they can help others through planned organ donation. Others may have their paperwork forged or a signature obtained through misrepresentation and fraud to get them out of the way.

    Like the elderly or the infirm, young people who are just starting out or people who have experienced a layoff or some other setback may also benefit from compassionate assistance at times. An unexpected pregnancy may be a source of distress for those who want their child but wonder how they will be able to care for her. As with assisted suicide, there is a tendency for people to want to provide a quick  “solution”that ignores the humanity of the mother, family and child.

    In promoting the “option” of legal abandonment, the euphemism “adoption” is used. A form of “assisted suicide” - the killing off of their motherhood or fatherhood through the removal of their child - is often held out to parents as the only help available. Parents may be further lured by the promise of making someone else’s life better by donating their offspring. Some parents may have the paperwork fraudulently handled to get them out of the way. Based on state laws, fathers frequently have their rights terminated for them before they even have a chance to establish paternity.

    In reality, a mother is much more than someone who “just gives birth”. A father is more than a "conception object".  A child is a part of his family the way a person’s arm or leg is a part of her body. Just like it would be unconscionable to remove a living person’s arm, leg or vital organ to provide it to someone else, it is wrong to remove a baby from her family for use by someone else. Whether the recipient treats the baby well is of no consequence.

    End-of-life arguments made by Pro-Lifers should also apply to unplanned pregnancy. As with assisted suicide, the argument about the need for compassion should be used when an unexpected pregnancy occurs.

    Adequate services, counseling and assistance are lacking.  Males need to take responsibility for pregnancy prevention as well as for all of their children - even those born when they are not married to their child's mother. 

    Limiting a woman's options may get more babies for adoption, but it is not healthy for moms and babies to be separated at birth.  (See effects of  adoption and effects of open adoption.)

    With proceeds from Choose Life Tags going ONLY for adoption "services", women have ONLY the "options" of abortion or adoption

    With Baby Safe Haven or Baby Moses Laws, a scared mom is given ONLY the "option" of baby abandonment.

    With Infant Adoption Awareness Training (IAAT), a mother's support system is being removed so she will feel she has no real options but to surrender her precious baby.

    A special "adoption language" is being promoted that will help to get more babies for the adoption market.  Mothers and fathers have been demoted to "birthmom objects" and "birthfather objects", while unrelated people are called "parents" long before they have even found a vulnerable mother to use as the source of a baby.

    Families are solicited for their healthy infant sons and daughters by means of "
    Dear Birthparent", "Dear Birthmom", "Dear Birthmother" letters, adoption business cards and by hiring "adoption professionals" to "counsel" moms in a way that will make it easier to get their babies.  With the intense promotion of open adoption and it's associated lies, we now have a shameful Domestic Adoption Baby Boom.

    Where pro-life views are concerned, respecting the dignity of life means respecting family relatedness.  Families should not be torn apart to get babies for adoption


     

     


    Posted at 09:31 am by warriorwoman
    Make a comment  

    May 12, 2005
    Doll Adoption - Exploitation of Women?

     
    Doll Adoption - Exploitation of Women? 
     

    Adoption Dolls are popular - first there were cabbage patch dolls and now there are  Newborn Nursery doll adoption centers, where the dolls look just like real babies.  While adopting a doll seems innocent, the concept of doll adoption is exploitative to women. 

    Just look at adoption quotes like this one:

    PURELY AMERICAN: LAWS, LIES AND LOVE, Dr. D. William Troxler, Capital College, 2000

    "The giver is called the birth mother or biological mother or natural mother. These terms cloud the fact that a mother who 'gave up' her child was authoritatively deceived at a vulnerable moment by her entire support system and the professionals who were supposed to serve her."


    When there are not enough real orphans for adoption, women and families who are naive or vulnerable are used as a source of babies. In reality, there is no such thing as a "birthmom" or "birthmother" - there is only the mother of the baby.   Read the following to see how agencies brag about separating more families to get babies:

    Domestic Adoption Baby Boom - exploiting  American women and families


    Doll adoption
    denies that the source of the  "adoptable baby" - the mother - even exists. 
     
    When adopting a doll, the doll's heritage and identity are obliterated  - in the same way that heritage and identity are obliterated for a child in a real adoption.  Read the following press release about adoption dolls and another press release about heritage and adoptee human rights
    Saks Newborn Nursery Infant Adoption - What is the Message to Little Girls?
     
     
    Before you dismiss concerns about doll adoption, read about the effects of adoption on moms and babies and the effects of open adoption on so-called "birthmoms" and siblings of the adopted-out child
     
     
    Dear Birthmom - Is Adoption Worth the Grief? 
     
     
    Many people say, "We have to adopt - what would happen to all those "unwanted babies" if we did not?  The number of supposedly "unwanted babies" seems to fluctuate based on the market demand, and on the adoptive buyers preferences.  In the 1960's, for example, Americans were told that millions of white babies were "unwanted" - yet black babies were almost always "wanted".   
     
    The truth is that an unplanned pregnancy does not mean an unwanted baby.  By the time a baby is born, nearly every baby is wanted by her mother - if not by her father, siblings, grandparents and other family members.  It may be true however, that certain families are unwanted by those who would maintain a patriarchal system - that is, families that are not of the "family-unit" type.  Killing two birds with one stone, those in power seek to decimate unwanted family types and supply the customers of "adoption services" with babies.  Babies are sold for adoption - just like adoption dolls.
      
    But won't more babies wind up aborted if they are not adopted?  Read the following articles to learn the truth:
     
    Choose Life License Plates are Misleading  (The message is not "life" but only "Choose Adoption")
     
    The following press release on Baby Safe Haven (Baby Moses Laws) provides some valuable insight into adoption as well as encouraging baby abandonment:
    Doll adoption may seem innocent enough on it's own.  See what Korean adoptees say about adoption and dolls for adoption.
    Regarding doll adoption - and adoption in general - adoption must be a good thing or why would it be promoted so much?  Perhaps it is simply because no one speaks out against it.
    Why Solicitation to Obtain Babies for Adoption Must be Outlawed  (Including"Dear Birthmother letters", adoption business cards etc)  
    Adoption Dolls are popular - first there were cabbage patch dolls and now there are Newborn Nursery doll adoption centers, where the dolls look just like real babies.  It's sad to see families torn apart for adoption.
     

    Posted at 10:35 am by warriorwoman
    Comment (1)  

    May 11, 2005
    Adoption "Ministry"?

    Adoption "Ministry"?

    One website has information about a series on "How to Start an Adoption and/or Infertility Ministry". What is an adoption "ministry"?  The website mentions the importance of "careful listening".  And then it instructs people on how to finance fertility treatments - including mentioning that desperate infertile people sometimes bankrupt themselves trying to make a baby. 

    "If you determine that you can afford $40,000 in your quest for a child, you might decide to budget $20,000 for one cycle of IVF (in vitro fertilization) and the remaining $20,000 for adoption. Or you may elect to try two or three IVF cycles. Whatever you decide, it’s imperative to be emotionally prepared to walk away from treatment when you’ve reached your financial limits."

    I may be slow...but this seems like a lot of money and effort put into helping aging people either 1) become fertile  or 2)  fake their "fertility" by purchasing a baby (disguised as payments for "adoption services") or creating an unrelated baby from "donated" raw materials.  I know lots of people who just have sex and voila!  they have babies - most of these "real parents" are young and fertile - it's so much easier that way! 

    Contrast this infertility business (er, infertility "ministry") with all the information out there about "delaying pregnancy".  "Delaying pregnancy" and "increased infertility"....Do you think there could be a connection?  Perhaps less emphasis on "delaying pregnancy" would help prevent infertility.
    For all the emphasis in this "adoption ministry" on "careful listening" and on adoption, there is little consideration for how the adopted person might feel about being adopted and deprived of his mother and family. Nor is there much about how the "birthmoms birth objects" will fare after adoption.  The website seems to promote the idea that the real mothers are to be honored as baby-manufacturing equipment  on "Birth Objects Day" (aka "Birth Mothers Day").   A "Grieving 'Birthmom' " is mentioned - perhaps to show that a mother's very real loss as the mother of her child may be brushed off as some sort of vague sentimentality.   

    Here's a paragraph that really caught my attention:

    "A few months ago, I ran into a woman who had attended that workshop while she and her husband were in the adoption process. She asked me how our sons’ birth parents were doing, calling them each by name. My mouth dropped open."
    So today it seems the adopting people have begun calling the "birth objects" by name - Isn't THAT sweet? 

    The effects of adoption separation on mothers and on their offspring are known.   Women have been used as if they were nothing but a source of babies for adoption.  And even if the life-long suffering of a real moms is of no real concern to people considering adoption, it's still a mystery why these people don't care about the child.  Adoption, Embryo Adoption, and other reproductive technologies deny a human being's heritage and human rights.

    When will the adoption ministry develop a heart and minister to those whose true families have been separated by adoption?  When will someone promote pregnancy options that focus on keeping the real families intact? 


    Posted at 11:25 am by warriorwoman
    Comments (2)  

    May 10, 2005
    Honoring Natural Moms on Mother's Day.

    Honoring Natural Moms on Mother's Day.

    Mother’s Day is for honoring mothers - grandmothers, step-mothers, working mothers, stay-at-home mothers. I have heard in some churches women who have had abortions have been remembered as the mother of their unborn child on Mother’s Day. But there are some mothers who have been forgotten - these are the mothers who have been used like livestock and had their babies harvested from them to be used for adoption. In the 1950’s, 60’s and early 70’s millions of white single mothers were punished for having a baby. Many were denied any information about childbirth. When they went into labor they were left alone with no support and no pain relief. But the worst punishment was losing their child. Some were not even told whether they had a son or daughter.

    The Mother-and-Child relationship is like no other. A baby bonds with her mother in the womb. A baby looks to her mother for security and no other caregiver - not even the baby’s father - can replace her. Many hospitals now recognize the importance of keeping newborns with their mothers, rather than separating them. Experts emphasize the benefits to a baby that come from nursing and her own mother’s milk, designed for her.

    Yet with all that is known about the importance of a baby’s mother to her well-being, some vulnerable and naïve mothers are still being led to believe that their infant sons and daughters will be better off with someone else. Even a dog breeder knows better than to separate puppies from their mother before they are sufficiently mature.

    This Mother’s Day, help and honor teenage moms and single moms who are taking responsibility for their children. Acknowledge natural mothers as mothers, not "birth objects" meant to be used as the source of a baby for adoption.


    Posted at 10:07 am by warriorwoman
    Make a comment  

    Next Page