I started this as a reply to another nasty birth mother commenting on yesterday’s blog, but it got too long. I did explain there, however, why I use the term “birth mother”.
So … moving right along …
“but the thing is, that your attitude towards natural mothers varies somewhere between frequently criticizing us and showing constant disrepect for us.”
My attitude? What does this person know of my attitude? Obviously, nothing at all.
Although I do criticize certain birth mothers … some are nasty, crazy bitches … I have never criticized birth mothers in general, nor have I shown disrespect. In fact, I have done exactly the opposite over and over again.
And, not believing coercion exists? You’re most certainly not talking about me. Check your facts.
The bottom line on ethics in US domestic infant adoption is written under one word: coercion.
Coercion of potential birth mothers comes in different forms, but all serve to undermine a expecting mom’s right to make the correct choice for her and her child, and blur the line between what is right and what is wrong about adoption.
Pressure tactics are probably the most obvious and insidious methods used to convince a pregnant woman that relinquishing her child at birth is the way to go.
Family members, sometimes well meaning but taking the short view, can be the first to start piling on weight after heavy weight of guilt, fear and diminishing expectations, as they postulate a doom and gloom scenario of the future.
It’s not unusual for parents to arrange everything from abortions to homes for unwed mothers to adoption by friends or relatives, without even consulting the expectant mother. By the time she’s informed, other parties can consider whatever action has been thought best a fait accompli.
If a situation is presented as hopeless, often hope isn’t looked for, and if the embers of fear are fanned into full-blown flames at the same time, even relatively simple options can disappear – go up in smoke.
You know who wrote that?
I did.
It’s part of a book on domestic adoption I was hired to write for Adoption.com, a book I was determined to have address the hard issues regarding adoption, and I refused to gloss over anything in favor of helping adoptive parents get the idea that it’s all about warm fuzzies. Jan Baker knows the book because I went to her repeatedly with questions while seeking real information I could pass on to potential adoptive parents. I ran almost everything to do with the triad by her for a valued opinion.
I also talked with Jenna Hatfield and quoted her on her experience with an unethical agency.
Here’s something else:
If an expectant mother can’t come up with very good reasons not to parent, everyone involved has an obligation to question why the child is being relinquished.
Has she been pressured into making this choice? Has she been encouraged to let someone else decide for her? Have there been lies involved, or strong efforts to diminish the experience and convince her that, “time heals all wounds,” and that she’ll soon get over any suffering she may feel from the loss of her child?
For the long-term happiness of all members of the triad, for the successful blending of birth parents/child/adoptive family that allows a child to grow in a safe climate of warmth and love, the foundations of the adoption must be solid and rooted in integrity.
Now, I know that many of the more rabid birth mothers will take issue, insisting that there is NO WAY IN HELL there can be any happiness or success or safe climates or warmth or love or integrity, but they are too far up their own butts to ever see the light so there’s not much point in trying to light a candle.
And here’s something I wrote just yesterday for Adoptive Parent’s Network, once again as advice to potential adoptive parents early in the process:
As hard as it may be when your longing for a child is great, it must always be remembered that what you are hoping so hard to end up with is someone else’s child right up until the point that child becomes yours, so respect, honor and ethics are paramount.
Once a match is made, there’s a face attached to the respect, honor and ethics mentioned in step eight … the face of the woman planning to place her child permanently and irrevocably with you.
Wherever and however your relationship begins, the fact is that she will always be your child’s first mother, and the sooner you understand that to the middle of your bones, the better. For the rest of your child’s life, this woman is half his or her eyes and hair and heart and kidneys, and all the nurture you so lovingly provide will not make her contributions any less integral a part of your child.
She will be the only mother for a very short time … a time that will be treasured and pondered and recalled a million times … and doing what you can to make this time as gentle, loving and without pressure as possible will benefit not only her, but the child, as well.
You will not be asked or able to assume the mother’s pain or fully comprehend her loss, but you must acknowledge it and allow her to deal with it in whatever way is best for her. This may mean more contact for a while, or no contact at all for a period of time. Do not judge.
It will be no simple thing to hold her sadness and your joy in your heart at the same time, but the reality of adoption requires that you try your hardest to do exactly that.
At the same time I was writing that, birth mothers were shoving each other out of the way to rip me to bits because I’m so ‘disrespectful’ … and not pretty enough.
What’s next, Ladies? Is there more unsubstantiated crap you’d like to pull from your collective ass and throw in my direction? It won’t stick, but you’re welcome to unburden if it makes you feel better.
A collection of my short stories:
I'm in this one, too ...
And I'm in here, as well ...
Paradise Preoccupied 
Oh! Oh! You HAVE to see this.!
Birth mothers resorting to name calling and … well, total idiocy. (What a surprise …?) This site must be the birth mother version of the National Enquirer, or whatever the top trash tabloid is these days.
http://dailydoofus.wordpress.com/2007/12/21/is-skanks-mean-or-mad/
Get this … the “2.” thing is her “setting up” my comment and the “her” refers to me …
I really have to wonder about the sort of person who would come up with the headings this person has pulled out of her ass! Hysterical! And she accuses me of having a pity party!
What a hoot!
The sad thing is that she probably doesn’t even begin to understand how and where her “logic” fails, and most likely her readers aren’t too clued, either. That is such a big part of the problem we run into when we try to converse with these rather limited nutcases. Well, that and the fact that some of them are just plain evil along with being loony.
I am wondering if I’ll ever get an apology out of any of them. Surely, there must be one or two who can read and think and absorb ideas and truths not premasticated by their dominatrix … or whatever. Maybe?
Okay, let’s discuss this in a logical and respectful manner.
Jan,
You wrote:
” “I’ve written before about how reticent I am to pin “Birth Mother” on attacks, but it’s getting very hard not to call a spade a spade.”
The thought of you being reticient or NOT calling a spade a spade is comical. I hear that respect is earned and your attacks on birth mothers are well documented, but YOU want respect? You want birth mothers to be nice to you? Hmmm……that’s pretty funny. Thanks for the chuckle.”
In light of the fact that you were used as a research tool for the above cited book on domestic adoption, why are you now attacking Sandra? Sorry, it just seems like you’re jumping on the “let’s bash Sandra” bandwagon for the fun of getting a lick or two in on your own. I must be wrong about that, so please….could you let me know what is so offensive to you about Sandra?
Rebecca? Addiepray? Others? You guys are strangely silent since Sandra put her concern for the welfare of both birth mother and adoptee in black and white. Is it okay for you to make unfounded accusations and then slink away?
Maybe I’m wrong and I’m misinterpreting what you guys are saying, so, here’s your chance. Why DO you guys have so much hate for Sandra that you would try to defame her character with accusations that, frankly, seem not only ungrounded but deliberately misleading.
They should focus their rage on groups like Focus on the Family.
They totally use those sort of tactics, including that wrong womb thing that gets under my skin so much.
Not all adoption, even domestic newborn is the same after all, things have changed over the years for the better and are continuing to change.
But, definetly the wrong person is being attached… I’d pounce on Dobson instead.
Tisha,
It seems to have a lot to do with desperate attempts to control the conversation. It’s obvious that logic, honesty and respect in dialogue isn’t part of the game plan and that anything goes … much like a cat fight. I have no idea if this stems from despair or if these are just horrid women on major power trips, but either way they are responsible for a big part of what makes the adoption world impossible to navigate. There is a lot of pain that can be laid at their feet, and some of that has to wash over the children.
For my part, I will continue to educate as I can and encourage hopeful adoptive parents to engage respectfully with women making adoption plans, birth parents, birth families in total, and to demand ethical practices. I can only hope that they don’t run into any of these people along the way, as any interaction could seriously compromise the process of building a positive relationship.
Wow about J. Dobson’s stuff. I read a book of his oh, must be years ago, now and I don’t remember finding it offensive at all. Pretty sure I didn’t read the “wrong womb” thing though….I woulda remembered that, I think, ick.
Well I do have to say that actually bringing up that you are shilling for A.com is pretty brave. You did forget to mention that it’s on sale for 50% off.
Sandra:
Still no apologies, huh? Well, I’d say it’s pretty much wishing on the moon to ask this particular group of women to act responsibly.
You must be doing great to get under their skin so much. Keep on championing for birthmothers, adoptees and adoptive parents. You’re definitely making a difference!
Love ya!
addiepray,
What an unpleasant piece of work you must be … but, whatever … that’s your cross to bear. You must really like the taste of bile.
Shilling for A.c? Interesting perspective. My words are still my words, and if you can’t admit that those words are caring, balanced and fair, well … once again, it’s your cross.
As I point out often, the book is available as an online guide for free. I have already been paid, so it’s no matter to me.
By the way, Jan Baker did one for them, too … a fact one might want to consider if tempted to call me a whore. I understant them’s fightin’ words if thown at a birth mother.
Actually my opposition to A.com stems from am issue involving adoptive parents rights. I may be nasty but I’m not supportive of discrimination. I assume you’re in favor of A.com’s stand on barring GLBT couples?
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/05/22/BAGJJPVD1V42.DTL
Oh and if we are talking about another book if I’ve confused this one with another that you have written I stand corrected.
http://adoptionshop.com/adoption_products/adoption.com-guide-to-us-infant-adoption.com-e-book.html
Not in favor of discrimination, you mean, unless it is aimed at me?
You should know what happens when you assume, and your ignorance is astounding. I would think twice if I were you and thinking about accusing me of any tinge of homophobia or an anti-gay stance.
Of course, if you insist on putting your foot in your mouth while sticking your head up your ass, that, too, will be your cross to bear, however oddly shaped it may have to be to accomodate.
That is the book I’ve quoted from, and … once again … it is available as an online guide at no charge. No reason for anyone to pay a penny to read what I have written about respect for birth parents, the vital need to demand ethical practices, and so forth.
Addiepray:
Are you still loading and locking? What’s your next shot? C’mon, throw it out there so Sandra can knock it out to left field again. It’s getting fun!
BTW, when are you (and by you I mean those of you who jumped on the “let’s bash adoptive moms and, in particular, Sandra”) going to realize that Sandra’s “lack of respect” for you and those who subscribe to the same type of nastiness has nothing to do with your position on the triad? It’s not prejudice or elitist or entitlement. It’s actually more personal than that. It’s based on your ACTIONS.
If you’re comfortable with profiting from sources that do support discrimination, you really shouldn’t get so upset when some questions are brought up about where you stand on the issue. As they say politics and profits can make for strange bedfellows.
As to admitting that the words you posted from your e-book being fair, they were. I just have to take into account the things you have said here. Your profane dismissal of first mothers, adoptees, and anyone else that might challenge you, does make me wonder how honest the words in your e-book are.
And we are in agreement, no one should have to pay a penny to read what you have written.
Oh, the high and mighty. Since you hide behind a username that doesn’t give a clue to who or what you are, people might rightly wonder about your bedfellows, but you are right that working for Adoption.com should have caused me some conflict with their blatant homophobia. It did. I took up the issue with editors … when we had real editors … and repeatedly voiced my concerns about the stance and strongly suggested attitudes be reconsidered. Not that any of this matters to anyone, especially you.
Profane dismissal? No, that would be you and dismissing my work out of prejudice is a glaring example of how quick you are to do exactly that.
Thankfully, people actually pay quite a bit to read what I write, so your assumption of agreement is much like the rest of those you so blithely make.
I can’t imagine given the title and the tone of this piece that anyone will feel contrite over what they have said. It seems like your commentors or missing that in their indignation.
I am sorry if you feel people are labeling and hating on you undeservedly, I think you are quite unaware of how some of the things you say come across.
You seem more like a “broad strokes” type of person, I think a lot of the nuances are really lost on you and the reactions you get really do surprise you.
It is a peculiar lack of sensitivity. It is not uncommon.
I’m just one voice among many. Just click on my user name if you want to know what I’m about.
As to my real name, you wouldn’t recognize it. I was never really too attached to it anyway, it was a do-over, I’m an adoptee, you know. My friends call me Mel, but you can call me Addie.
Joy,
I’m not at all surprised that no one has stepped up with an apology. I’m sure that would be considered some sort of betrayal in the clan. Stepping back, taking in some real information and giving some consideration to processing might be too uncomfortable, as well. A heavy investment isn’t easy to reevaluate, and I understand how difficult it must be.
It is worth noting that while more and more readers are following every day, the nasty commenters have trickled down to you, Addie and Jan Baker … die-hard nasties refusing to even consider that the abuse has been ill-considered and off-base, at best.
Of course, now that I’ve said that I’m sure the machine will kick into high gear and call up more of the troops in all their Borg-like glory.
“I am sorry if you feel people are labeling and hating on you undeservedly, I think you are quite unaware of how some of the things you say come across.”
Joy, this really resonated with me. But probably not in the way you think. It resonated with me because I don’t think YOU realize how you come across. Your tone is generally one of someone who assumes they are superiorly evolved coming across an ameobic life form. While this may not be your intent (and btw, I grant that this could be so) it is how you come across and it is as deliberate-sounding to us as you feel our words are to you. That in itself can be a huge barrier to any type of communication.
I stopped reading Nicole’s post quite a while ago for that very reason. I DON’T think she realizes how what she says comes across. I don’t read the blogs of those who post on her blog, either for that very reason. The whole insistence on finding and documenting the absoloute worst in adoptive parents is insulting, patronising, discriminating and alientating of the very people who are in a position to empathize, rally and demand change for and with the people who hold her opinions. However, it’s her blog and so it’s on me to find a way to resolve my feelings about the content of her blog. The problem is easily resolved by me simply deleting her from my radar. Problem solved. Win-win.
It’s a whole different ball of wax, though, when her blog becomes the scene of “let’s pile on (whoever)”.
The only reason I even knew of the spark that lit this keg (authored by Kim) is that I was sent a link to it. Against my better judgement I followed it. And I’m glad I did because I would never want someone that I even remotely respect to go into a den of vipers like what I saw there without someone to at least stand back to back with them. If I was walking down the street and saw one person being mugged by a large gang of people, I would jump in for that person, too. Even if I thought the person being attacked had said or done something wrong (which I don’t in this particular case), I would still try my best to help. Because what was happening was a group of people, smelling blood, sensed that this was great ground to gang-attack someone without getting too hurt themselves.
So, post on those kind of blogs in general? Nah, not interested. But can you count on me to get in the face of those who want to kick and scratch and bite and punch because they feel the safety of numbers? You bet I will.
Sandra:
Keep doing what you do. It’s why I read you. It’s why your readership is consistently rising. Hugs.
You know Tisha I agree with you on the point that I don’t always know how I come across, I tend to forget in the moment, how hurtful my words can be.
I may not agree with you or Sandra on a lot of points, but I certainly wish neither of you harm.
I know the quality that I accused Sandra of, arrogance, I possess, therefore it is not always easy to crouch things in a nonoffensive way as arrogance is a blinding character flaw.
At this point, through all the cross-posting, blogoshpere mess, it would take a week or so to find the source of how this Christmas snowball of ugliness began, and ultimately would just result in more finger-pointing.
I do regret being flip, and if I caused anyone pain with my words out of a misguided sense of protectiveness. Obviously my emotions run high on this topic and I let them get the best of me.
Pax.
“I may not agree with you or Sandra on a lot of points, but I certainly wish neither of you harm.”
You know what? I don’t think a lot of us in this current “Christmas snowball of ugliness” (great descriptor, btw) meant as much harm as we may have caused. As for protectiveness, well, yeah…..I obviously understand that, too.
Pax to you also. And to your family in this time when I, too, had the choice to better imitate the Christ in Christmas.
Out of respect for Sandra’s current pain, and the ones she has been hit with over and over these last weeks, I think I’m done with the snowball of ugliness. Just doesn’t seem to matter as much anymore. And I can be just as good a friend to her by offering comfort and support as I can by swinging punches.
Happy holidays, Joy.
[…] Really? Then how did you get pregnant? You don’t strike me as the immaculate conception type. Is this enough documentation Skanks or should we dig deeper? […]
Yo, Doofus,
Dig as you like, but may I suggest you learn a bit about attribution … and punctuation?
Why is it that none of the fringy nuts who so enjoy trying to find fault with me can place a comma correctly? There is a suspicious similarity in the criticism …