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.
Definition of villified: speak or write about in an abusively disparaging manner:
I've disagreed with you. I've not called you names. I AM feeling dismissive of your opinion on THIS subject, but I have not villified you. You're a lawyer...right? You know words matter. Your hyperbole doesn't make you seem smarter.
I don't think you quoted Busman accurately, and I am not "Jag." My middle name, FYI, is Bruce, and my handle starts with my initials.
Ok. All you've managed to show me is you're a misinformed person on this topic. And that's fine, but I know now that your opinion is nothing for me to be concerned about.
You seem unfamiliar on the way adoption works now in the US. It is ALL open adoption.
It was different in the past and apparently when you were involved with it. But to counter the excesses then with closed adoptions, the pendulum has swung way to the opposite direction.
That was uncalled-for. Holding a different opinion does not mean that he is uninformed. It means that he is coming at this from a different angle than you are. Because you are a birth parent, I give your opinions about birth-parent matters greater weight than I would some random person on the street. But when you opine about matters pertaining to adoptees, or adoptive parents . . . well, are you any more informed than he is?
That's your opinion. My opinion as an adoptive parent is that an open adoption would potentially cause a whole lot of problems, so much so that I refused to go that route. And I don't just "think" these problems are important; I KNOW they are -- to me. Please do not be so dismissive of my opinions on a matter (namely, issues involved with adoptive parenthood) in which I have direct experience.
There is a difference in having first hand experience, and getting second hand information from others or reading articles. So, I tend to agree with SnazzyB.
You didn't want open adoption, so you chose another route, therefore, the birth parent(s) were not obviously involved in the process or lacked concern about the children.
I have direct experience.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnazzyB
YOUR experience (since you actually HAVE experience) is valid. And I was not dismissive of your opinion. I was speaking to Jagusa. I actually GET your concern, as an adoptive parent. I don't blame you for not wanting an open adoption...I get it. I disagree with that...but I get it, and I don't judge you on it.
That is why there is a choice for the birth parents and adoptive parents, "preferences". What is right for one person isn't always right for the other.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnazzyB
Definition of villified: speak or write about in an abusively disparaging manner:
I've disagreed with you. I've not called you names. I AM feeling dismissive of your opinion on THIS subject, but I have not villified you. You're a lawyer...right? You know words matter. Your hyperbole doesn't make you seem smarter.
You were fine, and as an adoptive parent, I agree 100% with you. When people found out that we were trying to adopt, first through the state, and later through a private agency, many said some very rude things to us about the children that would be given up, some thought we would be stealing the child from their birth parents, and someone else said "I wouldn't want to raise someone else's child." Some people believe that adoption is wrong, and the list is endless with different opinions, but none that spoke negatively about either adoption or birth parents actually had adopted, so there opinion amounted to a total ZERO. Still we have people that adopt out-of-country, because they are unable to adopt in the US.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bu2
You seem unfamiliar on the way adoption works now in the US. It is ALL open adoption.
It was different in the past and apparently when you were involved with it. But to counter the excesses then with closed adoptions, the pendulum has swung way to the opposite direction.
While it is true that most adoptions are open, I did a quick search on that. What I learned is that in reality, even 37 years ago when we adopted our son, ours would have been considered "open".
In our case, our name and location were not shared with the birth parents but everything else from our homestudy was. They were allowed to ask for pictures and updates through the agency, and once our son was of age, facilitate a meeting if both sides agreed. That still qualifies as "open" to a degree that both birth and adoptive parents were comfortable with. That is the way it works. I would not have been interested in co-parenting a child, as I think that is an unnatural thing and would not benefit a child, and such a relationship would be better established with friends or family members.
The birthparents asked for an update one time when our son was 4 years old. I sent a photo and update. After that, we did not hear from them again.
Maybe since my older son is my biological son, I am more understanding when it comes to the birth parents.
I continue to be thankful every day that my son's birth mother chose "life" for our son. Should any family member contact the agency and want to meet our son, I would have no issue with that. It is their choice. Choice is good.
I think it is rather tacky to not be able to identify with the feelings of a birth parent, but maybe those without biological children will never get it.
There is a difference in having first hand experience, and getting second hand information from others or reading articles. So, I tend to agree with SnazzyB.
You didn't want open adoption, so you chose another route, therefore, the birth parent(s) were not obviously involved in the process or lacked concern about the children.
I have direct experience.
That is why there is a choice for the birth parents and adoptive parents, "preferences". What is right for one person isn't always right for the other.
You were fine, and as an adoptive parent, I agree 100% with you. When people found out that we were trying to adopt, first through the state, and later through a private agency, many said some very rude things to us about the children that would be given up, some thought we would be stealing the child from their birth parents, and someone else said "I wouldn't want to raise someone else's child." Some people believe that adoption is wrong, and the list is endless with different opinions, but none that spoke negatively about either adoption or birth parents actually had adopted, so there opinion amounted to a total ZERO. Still we have people that adopt out-of-country, because they are unable to adopt in the US.
While it is true that most adoptions are open, I did a quick search on that. What I learned is that in reality, even 37 years ago when we adopted our son, ours would have been considered "open".
In our case, our name and location were not shared with the birth parents but everything else from our homestudy was. They were allowed to ask for pictures and updates through the agency, and once our son was of age, facilitate a meeting if both sides agreed. That still qualifies as "open" to a degree that both birth and adoptive parents were comfortable with. That is the way it works. I would not have been interested in co-parenting a child, as I think that is an unnatural thing and would not benefit a child, and such a relationship would be better established with friends or family members.
The birthparents asked for an update one time when our son was 4 years old. I sent a photo and update. After that, we did not hear from them again.
Maybe since my older son is my biological son, I am more understanding when it comes to the birth parents.
I continue to be thankful every day that my son's birth mother chose "life" for our son. Should any family member contact the agency and want to meet our son, I would have no issue with that. It is their choice. Choice is good.
I think it is rather tacky to not be able to identify with the feelings of a birth parent, but maybe those without biological children will never get it.
I think its tacky to insult people without even understanding the point. The laws now are written for the birth parents and not for the children. Its not about ignoring the feelings.
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.
