Is the assumption that birth parents want privacy valid (birth mother, options, certificate)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Adoption and abortion are related in the same way as sex and pregnancy is related.
Pregnancy and baby is related.
Sex pregnancy baby how am I going to take care of this baby
Unplanned pregnancy what choices do I have keep the baby, abortion, adoption. Which one is right for me. Hmm I pick adoption because birth certificates will be sealed I can go on with my life and a child gets a chance at life, or hmmm abortion done and over hmm if I keep the child my parents will help, I'll get married.
It would be nice to compartmentalize each but it is impossible. The more choices the better or we are no different then the 1950's where there was one choice. No one size fits all.
I realize the adopted person is an important person in the adoption triangle. Perhaps even the most important person( at least when a child but we are talking about adults here) it starts with a decision a woman makes. The more choices she has to choose an adoption, the easier they make the process(although done correctly)the more chances of an adopted person to exist . It is that simple. It would be nice in this world if every pregnancy is planned, wanted and children are raise by parents but that isn't the case. Adoption numbers have gone down and one reason is abortion has come along and for some abortion is easier. Not for everyone but more woman choose abortion then adoption. For future pregnancy it just seems to me a chance at life without a birth certificate is better than no life at all. Also what is not mentioned on this board is while the number of closed adoptions are low there is a large percentage of adoptions that are semi open. They get lumped into being called open adoption. When in reality a semi open adoption shares information but not identities. Of course it is up to them if they eventually want to share identities. So there is still a good number of woman who at least in the beginning do not want their identities known.
In order to have any human rights you have to have a life first. Starts with the birth mother (woman) the more choices the better.
Perhaps you have already mentioned and I missed it, but what part of the "triangle" as you refer to it in your post above, are you? Just wondering because you appear to be sorely misinformed on a number of issues.
Dunn's bmother does not lack manners. Her biological child lacked insight into searching for someone who didn't want to be found. She does not know her bmother's story and it is none of her business to know it. That's what we get as children...what our parents - whether biological or not - choose to share with us. No more, no less. It's not a right to the child, it is a right of the parents (adoptive or otherwise). Dunn learned a painful lesson, and I doubt anyone is "cheering."
Yes, she does lack manners becuase it is rude to call another human being "it". Her biological grandchild (who is the one who did the searching) made contact, got the reply and then left the woman alone. Certainly Troy's mother showed more grace in her reply than her bmother did. There are better ways of saying "get lost" as I pointed out in a previous post. Thus Dunn's bgrandmother is now able to live her own life just like she wanted and Dunn's mother is living her life.
Quote:
It isn't even a loss to her birth mother to not know Dunn. She made an adoption plan. She chose not to know her at the time of her birth. Period. And I love the whole "despise" description...nice! Did she really despise her? Or, did she simply not give Dunn the answer she assumped she was owed? Life has a funny way of making us face realities we often fantasize about when we don't want to face the reality of our situation.
She called her an IT - that sounds like someone who has problems - sorry. If you heard a friend of yours call someone an IT - you would assume they had problems with that person. I don't call anyone an IT - that is a rude thing to do. I'm sorry that you disagree.
Quote:
You repeatedly claim birth mothers are owed more respect than you've actually shown this one. You defended the Quarterback's mom for being self-serving; yet, you degrade Dunn's for being honest. What gives?
If you read my last post on the quarterback's bmom, you will note that IF she had done as you said, then I might have agreed with you BUT that the story was a lot more complicated that that. Btw I didn't realise you considered the quarterback's bmom to be his mom. If Dunn's bgrrandmother had said "I'm sorry but I don't want contact, I have put that all behind me", I wouldn't have a problem - however, I do think 'If I knew it was going to call, I might have aborted it" is a vicious thing to say. Moderator cut: personal attacks
Quote:
For the record...domestic adoptions are on the rise, not the decline. Domestic wait times for infants is at it longest in years. It seems to me that birth mothers are risk of being exploited by this whole "open adoption" push in recent years. It isn't enforceable in the states. Once parental rights have been terminated, the child is legally no longer yours. But, if you tell an expectant mother that the adoption is "open" then she is more at ease to terminate her rights...what happens afterwards is a whole other ball game.
Yes, they are on the rise thanks to the NCFA birthmother training scheme. Also, you are in fact right that bmothers are being exploited by the "open adoption" push in recent years. It has been used as a hook by adoption agencies to get them to make a compromise they might not have otherwise made. I will try and find the article by the NCFA about their research which made them realise that women are more likely to make the compromise if they know they can keep in touch with their children. Sadly, many women who relinquissh their children don't realise that the adoptions can be closed at any time.
When we began our process I was told by two agencies that infant adoptions are on the rise again and as such, wait times longer than had been in previous years. Both private adoptions and through foster care. In fact, our wait time now was described to us by our social worker as "long" compared to say, one year ago.
In regards to domestic infant adoption, the bmother does choose the APs so sometimes some APs get chosen sooner, some later. There are many different factors for that, eg a PAP who wants nothing to do with the bmom may find that their wait is very long.
Just a thought also about Troy Dunn and his mother Katie. I note he is LDS which makes me wonder if he was adopted in and grew up in Utah although I note he is a LDS bishop in Florida. I am pretty sure both states are closed records states. Katie's adoptive parents may have been given information by the agency which was then given to her by her parents and she was able to locate her biological mother that way. One wonders if there was any non-ID info that might have also given her some insight into how her bmother might have reacted. I would say many adoptees do get some idea of how their bmothers might feel from non-ID info (available in most states).
If she had actually found out who her bmother was from an OBC acquired in an open records state, a state with a contact veto, it is highly likely her bmother would have put a contact veto on so that "it" wouldn't contact her and thus, her bmother would never have been contacted if she had got her OBC through official channels.
As I said above, in many closed record states, agencies did give identifying info to adoptive parents - regardless of the bparents wishes. It sounds to me that in fact, the agency did give identifying information to Katie's parents at the time of the adoption. I do know of other cases where APs were given identifying info at the time of birth, further proving that the anonymity was to protect the APs, not the BPs.
Btw BPs did want anonymity from society but not necessarily from their child.
Exactly. PUshing open adoption is no different then the era of closed adoption when we were told that keeping it closed was in the best interest of the child, the adopted parent and the birth parent.Takes us back to the 1950's. Let woman choose. Mutual consent.
Exactly. Each person is different, each case is different. Let those birth mothers involved make the decision they wish to make, if they want the records kept open or kept closed, and let them change their minds at a later time if they wish. What one wants may not be the same as what another wants and NO ONE else can think they know better than them and must decide for them.
Dunn's bmother does not lack manners. Her biological child lacked insight into searching for someone who didn't want to be found. She does not know her bmother's story and it is none of her business to know it. That's what we get as children...what our parents - whether biological or not - choose to share with us. No more, no less. It's not a right to the child, it is a right of the parents (adoptive or otherwise). Dunn learned a painful lesson, and I doubt anyone is "cheering."
It isn't even a loss to her birth mother to not know Dunn. She made an adoption plan. She chose not to know her at the time of her birth. Period. And I love the whole "despise" description...nice! Did she really despise her? Or, did she simply not give Dunn the answer she assumped she was owed? Life has a funny way of making us face realities we often fantasize about when we don't want to face the reality of our situation.
You repeatedly claim birth mothers are owed more respect than you've actually shown this one. You defended the Quarterback's mom for being self-serving; yet, you degrade Dunn's for being honest. What gives?
For the record...domestic adoptions are on the rise, not the decline. Domestic wait times for infants is at it longest in years. It seems to me that birth mothers are risk of being exploited by this whole "open adoption" push in recent years. It isn't enforceable in the states. Once parental rights have been terminated, the child is legally no longer yours. But, if you tell an expectant mother that the adoption is "open" then she is more at ease to terminate her rights...what happens afterwards is a whole other ball game.
When we began our process I was told by two agencies that infant adoptions are on the rise again and as such, wait times longer than had been in previous years. Both private adoptions and through foster care. In fact, our wait time now was described to us by our social worker as "long" compared to say, one year ago.
There was a case here where an 18 year old unmarried girl had terrible cramps and went to the ER. She never suspected she was pregnant, she was quite heavy and apparently for that reason did not have regular periods before and so the lack of periods never made her suspect she was pregnant.
She gave birth to a perfectly healthy full term baby, put the baby up for adoption immediately, she spent one night in the hospital and did not want even her parents to know she had given birth. The baby was adopted and the parents came to the hospital to take the baby home. This birth mother never bonded in any way with the baby. They made her hold the baby while she was in the hospital in case she would want to change her mind, she held the baby and didn't change her mind.
I can see in a case like that, she may never want the baby showing up in her life. She might not want to have to explain to anyone ever about giving birth the way she did. Whatever others might think or wish, to this young woman, the baby was a bad stomach ache and she really did not want to become a single mother when she found out she was.
Her reasons are her reasons alone. The baby may grow up and be curious about the mother some day, and maybe that woman will have changed her mind about sealing the adoption. The adoptee has a right to search but like for any one, searches can come up with dead ends.
How birth parents, particularly the mother feels about privacy is very different in differnt cases. Some what an open adoption, some not open, but they are willing to make or allow contact at some point and others want to go on with their lives and have nothing to do with their past. My guess, most moms who surrended their children always wonder how the children are or how they turned out. There was a time, when we adopted our children that all records had to remain sealed, no matter what. Those times have changed, each family has to decide what works best for them.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
