Conference turris::womannotes-v3

    A QUERY     by Jennifer Fechner
    
    
    how many times have you
      tried to imitate
      your lost mother's
      handwriting
    
    to commit fraud
    steal her medical records
      of giving birth
    
    so for once 
    you could conceive
    
    of the moment
      you flew, gorged on guilt
      out of an unknown vagina
    
    slipping and sliding
      from the birthing hole
    all slick and saturated
      on the lining
      of a stranger's uterus
    
    torpedoed from familiar water
      to
      smiling social workers
      hospital personnel
      religious nosey busy bodies
    
    
    then odd years later claim to
      everyday people
      the judge
      the prospective adoptive parent
      the woman you call mother
      the man you call father
      the siblings you call brother
         and sister
    
    that you wonder about your lost mother
      that slick dark
      uterine lining
    
    "Don't worry, she never
      even say you"
    
      your mother assures you like its
      some sort of comfort
    

BIRDS OF A FEATHER    by Jennifer Fechner


Every other Friday we gather, bidden by our desire for belonging.  We come 
unfocussed, blurry, needing.  Slinking up to the watering hole, we eye each 
other sideways, expectant.  Will we reach it tonight?

"I feel so ugly, I have absolutely no concept of what I look like."  We all 
twirl a finger for crazy in our minds for Bette is lovely.  We are shocked 
into recongition.  "Even after I met blood relatives, I still couldn't see 
myself.  Check out this photo of my mother before she died.  We have the 
same nose.  And she's beautiful."  Color rises in Bette's face and the rims 
of her eyes grow raw.

"At least you met your counsins.  I'll never study a relative," Hannah adds 
softly as we pass Bette's mother, intent on every detail.  Our breathing 
fills the room.

Linda breaks the silence, "I didn't look anything like my adoptive parents. 
They're Italian, dark.  They said I was Swedish, but it turns out I'm very 
Irish.  Seems obvious with my carrot hair and freckles, but how was I to 
know?"

We lean forward, straining to hear behind what's said.  With no fixed 
referant and life-long thirst for recognition, we became chameleon, always 
hidden from ourselves and unclaimed.

Hannah talks fast, staring at her hands, "I refuse to let anyone take my 
picture.  I take self portraits to study myself.  That way I have complete 
control.  I see my mother walking away from the restaurant, anonymous in 
the crowd.  Even if I could find her, this is who she is."

In this bastards' communion we devour each other's shame.  All of us were 
abandoned, relinquished, or stolen by the court.  Hannah, focussing our 
greatest fear, was left, swaddled, in a restaurant bathroom.

"My friend said, 'I always wished I were adopted.  At least you were 
chosen.'"  We groan in unison.  Sharon laughs, breaking the grim set to her 
face.  "I wanted to slap her!"

"It sucks," Linda answers, "My friend said, 'Just get over it.  She didn't 
want you then, she wouldn't want you now.'"

"Just get over it?" Bette snorts, sarcastic.  Wild looks shoot across the 
room.

"Get over it, get over it," we chant, abruptly harmonic in a giddy 
hallelujah.

***************************************************************************
Jennifer Fechner is an adoptee who runs a support group for adoptees.  This 
piece of prose is based on the experiences of the adoptees in that group. 

    This is in response to 49.111, but this discussion is more appropriate
    for the adoption note string....
    *********************************************************************
    
    >>I should point out that, ironically, at
    >>the same time that I know I would NEVER put a child up for adoption,
    >>I'm finding that the idea of adopting is very possible for me...
    
I don't find this very ironic.  As an adoptee, I could never put a child up 
for adoption, but I have considered adopting a child, not an infant, a 
child who needs a home.

    >>Except that all the nightmares I keep hearing about "children with a
    >>past" who were abused or addicted and have some hidden problem that
    >>could explode later is making me very wary...

It is a very real issue to consider that if one adopts an older child who 
has been abused, neglected, or has spent several years being bounced around 
"the system" that parenting this child will be a colossal challenge with 
mega-risks involved.  However, the other side of the coin that we rarely 
hear about (mainly because adoptive parents feel shame or guilt or are just 
plain afraid to make such admissions in this punitive and small-minded 
society in which we live) is that many of the adoptions where an *infant* of 
color is placed in a white family run into mega-problems when the children 
reach their teen years.  

I know that I don't sugar-coat my opinions when I'm talking about adoption 
issues, and I know that I've offended a good number of people by writing 
the things I write, both in their content and style.  Interestingly enough, 
it has been the adoptive parents who have experienced these teen year 
disruptions who have felt comfortable talking to me about these issues.  
They figured out, I assume by what I've written, that they would not be 
handed down a judgement on their parenting skills if they admitted that the 
non-white child that they had adopted was experiencing serious problems in 
adolescence.

In other words, regardless of the circumstances surrounding the adoption, 
there are no guarantees about what one's parenting experience will be or 
about what kinds of problems the adoptee might encounter. 

Since I vehemently believe that the purpose of adoption is to provide homes 
for children who need them, I would only consider adopting a truly homeless 
child.  Older children, children who are differently-abled, and children of 
color fall into this category.  I know my limitations and am very clear 
that I would be better equipped to take on the challenge of parenting an 
older child who had been abused than a differently-abled child.  For 
others, the reverse of this would be true.

Given my left-of-left opinions about adoption, the real kicker is that I 
lecture for an adoption agency that handles very traditional adoptions: 
white infants going to white, infertile, married couples.  Why?  (And I ask 
myself why on a very regular basis!)

I have several reasons for doing this:

I am a white, adult adoptee whose adoption was a very traditional 
adoption.  I grew up in an environment quite simialr to the environment 
that these prospective adoptive parents are planning for their adoptive 
children.  I want to (hopefully) break through some of their denial systems 
before they receive this child that they will parent.

I can scan the room and within a matter of minutes, figure out which 
couples will be the ones who will be truly open with their children about 
the issues surrounding adoption and which ones will give the messages to 
their children that it's not o.k. to talk about these issues.  

I sit in the circle, polished, clean, bright-looking and well-dressed; 
waiting for my turn to speak.

I drop all the hard issues like a sack of pototoes into the middle of the room.
Plunk.  

Alcoholism, drug addiction, delinquent behaviors, poor performance 
in school, limitless variations on these themes; all within the framework 
of having grown up in a non-abusive, white, privileged family with all the 
advantages that a child could possibly want or need.  I am the upper-middle 
class parents' nightmare parenting experience...the adoptee_from_hell.

I sit back and observe which jaws drop and which ones don't.  I feel the 
hostility of the jaw-droppers.  *Their* child will be different.  *They* 
couldn't possibly be faced with *those* issues if they do the parenting 
thing correctly!  The force of their hostility is a good measure of the 
depth of their denial.  And I also feel the support from the people in the 
room who didn't bat an eyelash, the people in the room who have a realistic 
attitude and view about adoption.

I feel the hostility and I feel the warmth.  I ask myself, again, "why?"

I do these lectures for every person in the room whose jaw dropped or for 
the people who are squirming in their chairs.  I do these lectures because 
I wish that someone had been there to give these lectures to my parents, 
and to the parents of my adoptee friends and to every person who has 
considered adoption.  I have the opportunity to make a difference perhaps, 
to pull on the fears and the denials of the white, infertile couples who 
are desperate to get a white infant.  If one tiny little hole is punctured 
in their denial system, if even one of the more close-minded couples is 
jarred into looking at things differently, then the hours that I have spent 
within that group are well worth it.

Laura
     

    This is in response to 49.113, but this discussion is more appropriate
    for the adoption note string...
    **********************************************************************
    
>So this trend is changing, slowly, but it is changing.  Black children who are
>not considered adoptable by white, heterosexual couples are in demand 
>within the gay and lesbian communities.  

##If this is true it's great.  And it will be very interesting to see
##the results of this (socially).  Although it is angering that the governemnt
##sees homosexuals as inferior parents, and that societies see blacks
##as inferior babies, I guess it is to the benefit of both that these
##presumed "inferior" people are being brought together.  A "silver
##lining"?

Well, D!, there *is* a lot about government views and societal views that 
stink, big time.  The above situation is no exception to this fact.  

BTW, I nearly fell off my chair when you mentioned the comment that some 
people have made to your parents about their race!  I didn't know whether 
to laugh, cry or beat my head against the wall in despair!

Laura

    My next-door neighbor's 10 year old daughter, my unofficial oldest
    child, is adopted.  Mandi knows this, always has.  Seems a happy well
    adjusted child, loves her family and they love her.  They spoil her a
    bit, she's an only.  She has occasionally brought up her adoption to
    me, once asked why a mom would give up a child.  I answered that
    sometimes the mother may feel that she is unable to take care of the
    child herself, or may be ill, and that because she loves her child she
    allows her to be adopted by someone who will love her as the mother
    did.  This was clearly food for thought.  Mandi does not ask about it
    often but I am sure she thinks about it more than she speaks of it.
    When she does, I make sure to tell her mom, but that is in common with
    my pattern with Debbie -- we keep track of eachother's kids and make
    sure the other knows of any issues that come up, whatever they are, and
    with kids there are always some!
    
    So, the question is, was I unbearably clumsy/insensitive in my answer?
    or was the answer ok?  Is there, what is a good way to talk to Mandi
    about her adoption, how should her questions be answered, what kind of
    reassurance if any is needed?  Are the painful issues for adopted
    children unavoidable?  Can the pain associated with it be lessened?
    I am sure I am not alone in asking these questions.
    

    
    re: .5
    
    >>She has occasionally brought up her adoption to
    >>me, once asked why a mom would give up a child.  I answered that
    >>sometimes the mother may feel that she is unable to take care of the
    >>child herself, or may be ill, and that because she loves her child she
    >>allows her to be adopted by someone who will love her as the mother
    >>did.  This was clearly food for thought.  

I think that for a child of 10 years old, the concept of your birthmother 
loving you, yet being able to give you away is a stretch.  But I also think 
that it's good that this concept get introduced early.

    >>Mandi does not ask about it
    >>often but I am sure she thinks about it more than she speaks of it.

This is probably true.  Many adoptees think about it more than they talk 
about it.  It varies, though, among adoptees.
    
    >>When she does, I make sure to tell her mom, but that is in common with
    >>my pattern with Debbie -- we keep track of eachother's kids and make
    >>sure the other knows of any issues that come up, whatever they are, and
    >>with kids there are always some!

I was curious why she asked you this question, and not her mom.  Do you 
have any sense about the kinds of messages that Debbie might be giving 
Mandi?  Does Mandi feel it is o.k. to ask her mom or dad about her 
adoption?
    
    >>So, the question is, was I unbearably clumsy/insensitive in my answer?
    >>or was the answer ok?  

Your answer sounded sensitive and caring.  Compare your answer to this 
scenario...

Mandi asks the same question and receives a look of shock or horror, or 
receives some sort of punitive response from the adult to whom she's 
addressed the question.  This kind of response still happens.

    >>Is there, what is a good way to talk to Mandi
    >>about her adoption,

With honesty, love and compassion.  Adoptive parents need to be clear that 
the adoptees questions are natural, they are not any indicator of love, or 
lack of love for the adoptive parents.  Children are *very* sensitive to 
picking up non-verbal ques that connote fear, discomfort, etc.

    >>how should her questions be answered, what kind of
    >>reassurance if any is needed?  

Give honest answers to the questions.  Encourage these dialogs.  As for 
reassurances...if a child feels secure in her/his family, I'm not sure if 
reassurances are needed.  

    >>Are the painful issues for adopted
    >>children unavoidable?  

Yes, in my opinion.  

    >>Can the pain associated with it be lessened?

Yes, in my opinion.  Honest communication about adoption issues is key.    

On a very political level, I think that everything in the world should be done
so that mothers and their babies do not have to be separated.  I feel that the
severing of the maternal bond creates a severe trauma for an infant.  From 
what I can see, many adoptees carry some of the symptoms of post-traumatic 
stress syndrome.   It is not natural for infants to be separated from their 
mothers and it does create a trauma when this occurs.  This is the baseline 
reality of every adoptee.  Denying this or pretending that it doesn't 
impact the child doesn't magically fix everything.  Instead of creating 
societal structures that support women keeping their babies, we have  
structures that impede this from happening.  Single women can and do keep 
their babies, but the stress and trauma in trying to manage such a situation is 
almost unmanagable.  

Just as there are very few white people who are open to adopting black 
babies, there are very few fertile couples who are interested in adoption.  
Most fertile couples do not create families via adoption (there are 
exceptions).

Because there are so few fertile couples willing to adopt, if every 
infertile person could be cured tomorrow, white babies would be added
to the list of unadoptable babies.

In *my* ideal world there would be no more adoption and no more 
infertility.  Of course, there would be no more child abuse, homeless 
adults, starving people, war, etc.

My dream is to open a home, or several homes where single women who have 
limited resources and who want to keep their babies could live and receive 
support and childcare for the first year of their child's life.  

Laura

>    >>When she does, I make sure to tell her mom, but that is in common with
>    >>my pattern with Debbie -- we keep track of eachother's kids and make
>    >>sure the other knows of any issues that come up, whatever they are, and
>    >>with kids there are always some!

>I was curious why she asked you this question, and not her mom.  Do you 
>have any sense about the kinds of messages that Debbie might be giving 
>Mandi?  Does Mandi feel it is o.k. to ask her mom or dad about her 
>adoption?
    
    I was not clear, sorry.  Mandi has asked this and similar questions of
    her mom and dad, and has been given open and honest answers.  I believe
    that she does feel comfortable talking to her parents about being
    adopted, and about her birth parents; or at least as comfortable as any
    child can feel.  Debbie has a poem about adopting a baby up on a wall
    in her house; don't remember much of it very well but it starts out by
    saying that the child grew "not in my body, but in love, in my heart"
    or a phrase of similar intent.

    Where I asked in .5 if my answer to Mandi's question had been a good
    one, Laura asked me to consider the following scenario:
    
>Mandi asks the same question and receives a look of shock or horror, or 
>receives some sort of punitive response from the adult to whom she's 
>addressed the question.  This kind of response still happens.
    
    That's hard for me to conceive of.  But a lot of human behavior is
    hard to comprehend...

>My dream is to open a home, or several homes where single women who have 
>limited resources and who want to keep their babies could live and receive 
>support and childcare for the first year of their child's life.  
    
    I've often wondered why this kind of group living arrangement is not
    tried by families of limited resources.  It seems to make such sense.
    My guess though is that it is hard to get enough compatible people who
    agree on how to live together and how / how much to commit to
    eachother.  Just look at how hard it is for only 2 people to agree (in
    a marriage, I mean).  But I think your idea is a really good one.
    
    Thanks for the answer
    
    Sara

    In re adoption of black children by white parents.
    
    About 20 years ago, many social workers, appalled by the large number
    of black infants/chidren that were not being placed began to actively
    recruit white parents for these children. There was quite a lot of
    interest and many children were placed across racial lines.
    
    However an organization of black social workers objected very strongly
    to this practice and essentially brought it to a halt. There were
    a wide variety of objections including that they felt the children
    were being adopted only to be servants, that such adoptions were
    genocidal in nature and intent, and that such children would not
    grow up to be really black that they would lose their culture.
    
    One positive outgrowth of this movement was that agencies began
    to recruit more actively in the black community and revised their
    standards of what made a 'perfect' home to include single and
    blue colar families.
    
    The groups founded to support adoption across racial lines have pretty
    much disappeared.
    
    I believe however, if rules were relaxed and people of all races
    encouraged to that the child that needed them rather than worry about
    race that there would be an increase in such adoptions both white by
    black and black by white, to the advantage of black children/infants
    and white older children. (all of whom are considered hard to place.)
    
    and I often tell people that my kids are adopted or show their pictures
    for reasons similar to D!'s and also so that people who see us together
    will know these are *my* kids, not foster kids or neighbor's kids or..
    
    Bonnie

    here in colorado springs, a tv news station has a waiting kid section
    that introduces a child/children that are in need of homes.  if the
    child/children are black, they always say that only black parents would
    be considered.  they also say the same for mexican children, only
    mexican parents would be considered.  they explained it as a cultural 
    issue,  that social services is concerned that both of these races 
    would be "injured" by the "whites" who want to adopt.  I have never
    heard the black community or mexican community (in colorado springs)
    just consider the poor kids waiting, and waiting for someone to love, 
    color or race, not an issue.
    
    I've called about a couple of the kids they interviewed and when I told
    them that I puerto rican, I was flatly refused when they learned that I
    had no black or mexican blood.  There are very very few puerto ricans in
    colorado springs, so the chances of adopting a child from my own
    race would be astronomical.
    
    vivian

    I too read an article somewhere not long ago that the black community
    or at least some black people feel that there should not be interracial
    adoptions; they feel the black children will lose sense of their
    heritage; some even said, they resent having white couples who can't
    have their own kids, 'take' their black children from them.
    All in all, it seems the losers here are, as usual, the children.
    Maia
    

>   some even said, they resent having white couples who can't
>    have their own kids, 'take' their black children from them.

Right.  As if there are black couples standing in line to adopt black
children and the white couples are taking away the black couple's chances.
These kids are unwanted!  There aren't enough black people adopting to
take all the black children, so if white people don't adopt them, they
will end up growing up in foster homes, bouncing from one home to another
their whole lives.

I'm not sure whether it is better to raise black kids in black homes than
in white homes.  I *am* sure that it is better to raise all kids in homes
rather than in no homes, regardless of the color of the kid or the 
parents.

>    All in all, it seems the losers here are, as usual, the children.

And so it always is.

D!

    D!
    
    I definitely agree with your statement that it is better for kids
    to be raised in loving homes with parents no matter the color of
    the kids or the parents than to be raised in foster care.
    
    I can see things in Stevie that related to his time in foster
    care that I don't see in the other 3 that have nothing to do
    with his mental impairment.
    
    Bonnie
    
    and many of those black kids are being brought up in white foster
    homes btw, and with people who may well be less sensitive to
    issues of racial pride and identity than white couples or singles
    who actively choose to take a black or mixed race kid.

    re:.10
    
    	� [...] they feel the black children will lose sense
    	of their heritage [...] �
    
    As if kids with no parents will have a sense of *any* heritage!
    
    Seems to me that one of the benefits might be growing up in an
    environment where one learns that skin color is just another
    physical characteristic like hair or eye color.
    
    --- jerry

    
    Sorry Jerry, I couldn't disagree more.
    
    Black children with no parents are still part of a race which is
    stigmatized by this society. Even if their immediate roots are unknown,
    they aren't that far behind the rest of us, since few blacks can trace
    their ancestry very far, even if we really wanted to. Black people who
    go around pretending that no one is going to give the color of their
    skin any more consideration than the color of their eyes are not just
    harmlessly fooling themselves, but typically letting themselves get set
    up for a real ugly confrontation with reality.
    
    The three things that people (Americans) first recognize in others are
    sex, race and height. Consciously or unconsciously, they set off
    trigger points for social behavior. And some of it ain't very positive.
    
    Heritage, for black people, goes farther than just who your parents
    are. Black people have a collective heritage caused by the painful
    exodus of our ancestors from Africa to America, some stopping on the
    islands. We have a collective heritage of art, music and dance which
    are strikingly UN-European. Vibrant, exhilarating, rhythmic, flowing.
    different.
    
    It would be bad enough to be an adopted black child, but to be placed
    in a home with people who have neither the understanding nor the
    interest in recognizing the heritage of black Americans seem to me to
    be a horrible extra burden. I'm not saying that white couples shouldn't
    adopt black children, but in doing so, I would hope that they would
    educate themselves on the heritage of black Americans, and learn to
    appreciate it on its own merits so that they can proudly hand it to
    their children.
    
    People with a heritage can choose to ignore it; people without one will
    often do a lot of searching to fill the void.

re: 'ren's points

I'm reading "In Search of Our Mothers' Gardens" by Alice Walker. Many of her
essays have to do with re-discovering her heritage as a black Amercian woman
writer. She really brings home how that heritage has been muffled and shoved
aside, and how enriching it is for her, and can be for others.
	Mez

    I agree that the best parents for African American children are African
    American but that's not always an option. From what I've heard it's
    fairly easy for a newborn black baby to get adopted but the older
    ones... that's a tragedy. In my mind it is most important that black 
    children have families.
    
    Also, some African American communities have encouraged adoption
    through churches and other social institutions. 
    
    It shouldn't cost anything to adopt a child and, if it is a special 
    needs child the government should continue to subsidize health care as
    part of the package to black families who can not afford the other way.
    
    
    Kate

    re:.14
    
    I was thinking more in terms of personal heritage, but I see your
    point, 'Ren.
    
    Consider this, though: black children who have no direct connection
    with their cultural heritage (through parents) can still discover
    that heritage. They can easily see that they are "different" and
    by looking to others of their race, find that rich but lost heritage.
    Can the same be said for any Caucasian?  If I had been an orphan,
    and was taken in by foster parents, would I have ever known that
    I was half Armenian, and had the chance to discover that cultural
    heritage (which isn't exactly generic European)?  More likely, I
    would've been subsumed by whatever cultural heritage belonged to
    my hypothetical foster parents.
    
    (Actually, I have little interest in my Armenian heritage, but as
    my example is hypothetical anyway...)
    
    I agree that being raised in a "race free" ethic can result in a
    rude shock when experiencing the real world. But I can't see that
    the benefits of having a loving set of parents who do not consider
    skin color as significant can be worse than the alternative of
    growing up (a) with no parents at all, and (b) entrenched in that
    same shocking real world.
    
    --- jerry

    re:-1
    
    From what I have heard, Jerry, African American children of white
    parents are more sensitive to race. Being half Armenian, you probably
    look alot like my Italian relatives. It is much easier for whites to
    assimilate into American culture. Irish, French, Polish; it really
    doesn't matter too much. In a generation a total assimilation will take
    place. Many African Americans have been here for well over 100 years.
    Most African Americans are part white but, still the black skin color
    still comes through.
    
    Kate

    
    Jerry,
    
    There's a note in blacknotes about something similar. The reason I
    stated it as I did is that, typically, if there is no one to point out
    to a child the importance of his/her heritage, it doesn't sink in.
    Worse still, in the case of black children, one's black heritage is
    seen as the rest of society would: from different and not of any
    interest to the majority to crude, inferior, not art, primitive and
    unacceptable. Try and count the number of people you know who have
    invested in African sculpture. Or a painting/batik by a black artist.
    Its been a long hard road for African and African-American culture to
    gain acceptance in America. Just as it continues to be a tough road for
    African-Americans.
    
    I guess with my perspective, I've known tons of "ethnic" Americans like
    you who don't give two sh**s about their ancestry. And to me, it almost
    seems like you don't have to, because America is so much more willing
    to embrace you into the fold. My heritage becomes important because its
    something that celebrates me in a country that frequently degrades and
    rejects my people. 
    
    But hey, you saw my point; I'll stop beating it to death. And you're right,
    better any loving home than none.

    re: .17
    
          
    >>Consider this, though: black children who have no direct connection
    >>with their cultural heritage (through parents) can still discover
    >>that heritage. They can easily see that they are "different" and
    >>by looking to others of their race, find that rich but lost heritage.
    
Well, this black child may or may not feel comfortable exploring his/her 
lost heritage.  A lot depends on the attitudes of that child's adoptive 
parents.  Plus, I don't think the issue is quite so simple as a black child 
being able to see that s/he is different and thus go on a quest for his/her 
lost heritage.  I would think that there might be some cultural difference 
between black people from Trinidad and black people from Africa, or for a 
black person who might be of mixed heritage...Afro-American/Mexican, etc.  
(Please correct me if I'm wrong about this Lauren.)  It is like saying that 
all caucasian people come from the same heritage by virtue of having
pink-toned or pale beige colored skin.  

    >>Can the same be said for any Caucasian?  If I had been an orphan,
    >>and was taken in by foster parents, would I have ever known that
    >>I was half Armenian, and had the chance to discover that cultural
    >>heritage (which isn't exactly generic European)?  More likely, I
    >>would've been subsumed by whatever cultural heritage belonged to
    >>my hypothetical foster parents.
    
This not only happens to orphans in foster homes, this also happens to 
adoptees whose records have been sealed by the courts.  I believe that the 
pressure can be even greater for a causcasian adoptee with caucasian 
adoptive parents to take on or identify with the cultural heritage of the 
adoptive parents.  
    
    >>But I can't see that
    >>the benefits of having a loving set of parents who do not consider
    >>skin color as significant can be worse than the alternative of
    >>growing up (a) with no parents at all, and (b) entrenched in that
    >>same shocking real world.
    
As long as we don't get lulled into making the assumption that all adoptees 
automatically grow up in loving homes because the adoptive parents have 
been interviewed and 'approved' by social workers.  And again, if our 
society put any kind of importance on doing everything possible to support 
mothers and keep mothers and babies from being separated, this would start 
to address some of the problems, not all, but some.

I think the other thing that these kinds of discussions point out is that 
adoption is not this quick, simple fix to an untimely pregnancy or for a 
child without a home.  It is a complex issue that impacts all involved for 
as long as they live.

Laura

>This not only happens to orphans in foster homes, this also happens to 
>adoptees whose records have been sealed by the courts.  

This is strange.  My brother's racial make-up was considered a matter
of public knowledge (unlike the identity of his parents) and was freely
told to them, and in turn to him.  In fact, there was a fair amount
of personal information given to my parents by the adoption agency and
as far as I know it didn't violate ny confidenailty rules.  (For
instance the information that Daniel's father was black and a basketball
player; that his mother was half Irish and half Mexican and was a 
high school student; that they weren't married; etc, etc.)  Is 
this unusual?

D!

>>In fact, there was a fair amount
>>of personal information given to my parents by the adoption agency and
>>as far as I know it didn't violate ny confidenailty rules.
>>Is this unusual?                                               
    
    D!,
    
    Adoption law varies from state to state, so a lot depends on where
    Daniel's adoption was finalized.  In some states there have been
    movements to restrict access to even non-identifying information!  In
    other cases, it depends upon the adoptive parents.  My parents say that
    they didn't ask for any information about where I came from (a
    statement which does not give one a real positive message about being
    an adoptee!).  Even if I had wanted access to non-identifying
    information, such as nationality/age/religion of birthparents, I
    wouldn't have been able to request it until I was 18 years of age.  The
    other thing is that many adoptees don't even know what information does
    or does not exist, or if and when they can have access to it.
    
    So in terms of adoption law, etc., not only does this vary from state
    to state, but the year that one was adopted also impacts having or not
    having access to information.  It is all so dreadfully complicated,
    especially in the instances of adoptions that took place between the
    40s and early 60s.
    
    I also think that parents who adopt a child that is a different race
    from them would look pretty foolish if they tried to "hide" the
    difference!  In my case, as in many 'traditional' adoptions, I was
    adopted into a same-race family and was told that I was Irish (when in
    fact I am French and Polish).
    
    Laura
    

    
    Laura, black heritage in and of itself is a tricky thing. Few of us can
    trace our ancestry to specific regions of Africa, we can only make
    guesses. I have not noted ANY observable physical differences between
    blacks here and blacks from the islands, i.e. Trinidad/Tobago, Jamaica,
    Bahamas, Guyana, etc. So, if I child was adopted who was born with
    parents from the islands, I don't know if you could tell if the agency
    said nothing to the parents. And this would be sad, because the people
    of the islands had a different experience. In many instances, they
    overthrew their slavemasters and claimed the lands, hence they have a
    far stronger sense of pride in themselves, and are frequently shocked
    at how cowed and whipped most black Americans are. They don't put up
    with racism as automatically either. And their culture is richer, more
    pronounced in its Afrocentricity. There's a lot of envy and sometimes
    resentment between "native" black Americans and immigrants.
    
    On the other hand, the basic root, Africa, is similar enough so that we
    often lump it all together. Hmm, I shouldn't say that. Africa is a huge
    continent and its people are EXTREMELY diverse. Probably more so than
    Europe, including Russia and the Slavic countries. You just don't find
    out if you don't explore it. The problem, again, is not knowing where
    you come from. So, we tend to embrace it all, and claim it all. 
    
    There's not a lot of comparison between "black" heritage, and Armenian
    heritage. We really are identifying ourselves with a race of people,
    spanning a continent and beyond, with different cultures and only a few
    common threads. It would be more appropriate to compare black heritage
    to European heritage, and to try to figure out how to define that. 
    Basically, adopting black heritage starts small and can get as big or
    specific as you want. For most of us, it starts with the idea that
    there ARE black heroes, and we tend to go from there. A lot of American
    heroes, like John Wayne, Elvis Presley and even a few presidents,
    thought we were total scum, so we need to find our own.
    
    Lord, how I *do* ramble about this. I guess, to me, its so important
    for black children to have heroes, culture, etc., since the standard
    ones in America will often leave us out. When parents of any race are
    busy pushing "ye old 'colorblind' theory", the kids miss out. Like
    forgetting to mention that Jesus had nappy hair.
    
    YOu get the idea.

For folks interested in some of the ideas 'ren has brought up, Alice Walker's
"In Search of Our Mothers' Gardens" has several essays devoted entirely or in
part to reclaiming her black heritage.
	Mez

    D!
    
    The kind of non identifying information that your parents were  given
    about your brother was given to me about all four of my younger
    children.
    
    Bonnie

    
    Re .23
    
    Your note brings up the difference between race and cultural heritage.
    Race is typically used to decribe large groups of people who are
    grouped primarily by the shade of thier skin whereas heritage is
    more related to the culture to which your ancestors belonged to.
    
    A good example is whites of european descent would all be called
    white however each might trace thier roots to a different cultural
    group.
    
    In this vein of thought you can see that one of the most tragic
    legacies of slavery is that many african americans cannot trace
    thier ancestry back to the african culture which thier ancestors
    belong to.  Let me say that I am not an african american and
    can only speak from my interactions with black friends, however
    it seems that african americans have created an african american
    culture of thier own in america which a mixed race adopted child
    might miss without the active intervention of the adopting parents.
    
    
    

    RE:-1
    
    Harry,
    
    That's exactly what I meant to say. 
    
    Thanks,
    
    Kate

    This discussion has been very worthwhile, and the big point that
    I've gotten out of it is that most of us (and I count myself in
    this group) are trying to create a simple model for a complex
    problem. Ren, the comments from your viewpoint have been very
    enlightening. I suspect that because I'm not especially interested
    in my heritage, I put too little value on its importance to others.
    
    The tendency to lump all blacks as being of one heritage is not
    uncommon. It's happened to Caucasians as well. Many Amerinds tended
    to refer to Caucasians as "Europeans", with little if any concern
    that the Spanish culture may be different from the English. And
    in turn, many people tend to think of a monolithic "Amerind culture"
    when each tribe is actually different from the next.
    
    And this simplistic view goes beyond just racial/ethnic/cultural
    heritage. Don't we all lump people together in some sort of
    monolithic pigeonhole, whether it be "Liberals" or "Feminists" or
    "Christians", as is every member of each group acted as one in
    word and deed and belief?
    
    But, I think this may be ratholing the topic at hand.
    
    --- jerry

    Did anyone watch Oprah yesterday? It was about white families adopting
    black kids. There were two black girls who were adopted by white
    parents and seemed happy with it. There were two black men (social
    workers I think) who said that the problem is always presented as
    white families vs no families when in reality there are many black
    families who would like to adopt. They said the black families either
    don't know about it or don't qualify because of stringent criteria.
    They also mentioned that adoption costs a lot of money ($15,000 ?)
    and adoption agencies are in the business for making money. 
    I'm curious. Does it cost big bucks for an adoption? And what are
    the criteria used for selecting families?
    
    Manisha

    I know it costs a good deal to adopt, but I have also heard that some
    corporations (including DEC) contribute to the fees (I think DEC
    contributes $1500 or something.....)
    
    I saw the beginning of the show....the two young women seemed confident
    and comfortable with themselves, but had run into racial issues on both
    sides of the fence while they were growing up (not white enough, and
    not black enough, to please either side sometimes....)
    
    -Jody
    

    Private agencies have a sliding scale based on income. They are
    not in the business to make money, but rather they support a wide
    variety of services, foster care, support for the mother, and in
    many cases (such as Catholic Charities) many other types of
    social services as well. They are non profit to my knowlege.
    
    Actually far more minority children are placed in homes by the
    state agencies which have much lower to no fees depending on
    the situation. (Again fees may be adjusted by income). The problem
    here may well be too few social workers to recruit families.
    
    Bonnie

This is my first foray into this file, so if I inappropriately step on some
toes I beg forgiveness in advance.  I am more used to Soapbox "discussions"
than those that I may find in Womennotes.....

My mind whirls with potential lines of discussion.  The topic of adoption is
very close to me.  I am both an adoptive parent and a "potential" adoptive
parent, so my view of the world may differ from that of some others.  That is 
as it should be, however.

I find it very interesting, and actually quite distressing that there is a 
great deal made out of the "rights" of two sides of the adoptive triad, yet
one seldom, if ever, hears of the rights of the adoptive parents.  I speak
mostly from the perspective of "potential adoptive parents" now.   

It seems that while a couple is waiting for an adoptive child they have become
subject to some incredible stresses and the whims of both agencies and birth
partents.  This is due in large part to "open adoptions".

Recently, a dear couple that was waiting for a child were told of a girl by
the agency that had "selected" them to parent her child.  They waited in 
great anticipation for the moment when the child would arrive.  They were
called when the young lady went into labor....they were called when the 
little girl was born.....they were told they would be able to pick up their
daughter on Thursday.   Then the other shoe dropped.  They were told (on
Wendsday) that the birth mother had decided to keep the child.

They were literally devestated.   They had really invested a tremendous
amount emotionally in this little girl.....they had even begun to bond
in absentia, so to speak.  And then to have it all jerked out from under
them like that was akin to a late term miscarriage for that family.

I understand that the birth mother has considerable rights, and that even
the firmest decision may be affected by the hormonal events that take place
after delivery.  But I really wonder what rights SHOULD the adoptive parents
have?  If any....

	Ed Edwards

Ed,

I suppose that many people would say that my views on adoption are to the 
left of left...but, like you, I carry a unique perspective regarding 
adoption because I am an adoptee.

>>I find it very interesting, and actually quite distressing that there is a 
>>great deal made out of the "rights" of two sides of the adoptive triad, yet
>>one seldom, if ever, hears of the rights of the adoptive parents.  I speak
>>mostly from the perspective of "potential adoptive parents" now.   

And I would say that adoptees have no rights in the triad.  As infants, we 
got no choice about being separated from our mothers.  I know it may be 
hard to hear, but the severing of that maternal bond is traumatic for an 
infant.  It is a hard fact of adoption.  It is not a statement of who is 
right or wrong, good or bad, it is just one of the facts.  As an adult, I 
still have no rights, in my opinion.  I am not "allowed" access to my 
original birth certificate.  And if it weren't for 'underground' 
organizations, I would have been legally blocked from finding my families 
of origin.

>>It seems that while a couple is waiting for an adoptive child they have become
>>subject to some incredible stresses and the whims of both agencies and birth
>>partents.  This is due in large part to "open adoptions".

This is true.  I think that the process of adopting a child is an 
incredibly invasive and sometimes insensitive process.  I don't think, 
however, that open adoptions are responsible for this.  If you talk to 
people who adopted in the closed adoption system, they will tell you that 
they felt the same way.  I do think, however, that referring to the most 
painful and life impacting decision of relinquishing a child as a 'whim' is 
somewhat minimizing the real pain that a woman goes through when she is 
faced with an untimely pregnancy.

>>They were told (on
>>Wendsday) that the birth mother had decided to keep the child.

I am not trying to minimize the bonding that had begun on the part of your 
friends, who were waiting to adopt this child, but I think you also have to 
take into account the bond that the mother has with her child.  I am of 
the opinion that the purpose of adoption is to provide homes for children 
who need them and should not be looked at as a solution for infertility.  
Infertility is a real problem, a devastating problem, but it needs to be 
separated from the issues of adoption.  I wish that in this society we had 
more mechanisms in place that would prevent children from being separated 
from their mothers.  I don't think that severing of this maternal bond is a 
good thing for children.  I think we would be doing things differently if 
we really believed in the concept of, "in the best interest of the child."

>>I understand that the birth mother has considerable rights, and that even
>>the firmest decision may be affected by the hormonal events that take place
>>after delivery.  

I think that the decision to keep the child rests on more than just 
hormonal events.  Many women's lives have been wrecked by making this 
decision, the decision to relinquish their child.  And this society, on one 
level, tells women that they are being loving and noble to give their child 
to someone else who can better provide, etc., for the child.  And before 
the ink is even dry on the adoption papers, soceity turns around and 
condemns the woman with the attitude of  "what kind of woman could give up 
her child?"  It is a horrible, no win situation.  There also an underlying 
assumption that the potential adoptive parents will be better parents than 
the (single) mother could be.  Well, maybe they will be and maybe they 
won't be.  There are no guarantees.  I have worked with a lot of adoptees 
who have been abused in their adoptive homes so adoption doesn't guarantee 
a safe home life for the child.  In fact, I am finding that adoptees are, 
perhaps even more vulnerable to abuse than non-adopted children.  I am not 
making a statement that all adoptive parents are abusive.

>>But I really wonder what rights SHOULD the adoptive parents
>>have?  If any....

I don't think that prospective adoptive parents have 'rights' in terms of 
the mother changing her mind about relinquishing her child.  There are 
'risks' associated with being pregnant.  A woman could miscarry, have a 
still-birth, give birth to a child with some sort of life-long 
physical/health issue, etc., etc.  There are risks associated with 
adoption.  They are different sets of risks.  All this is terribly 
hard anyway because it makes it sound like the child is nothing 
more than a commodity.  

It's very hard for me to not come off sounding like Atilla the Hun, but I 
hear the stories of adoptees, the stories of birthmothers running through 
my head.  I have witnessed their pain...the woman who broke the restraints 
that were holding her down as her son was being born, who was then 
anesthetized against her will so she wouldn't be able to see her child, the 
stories of serious abuse of women at the hands of the doctors, just because 
they were identified as the women who were giving away their children.  Their 
experiences could be classified as sanctioned rape. Women have been  
physically damaged during the birthing process because the doctors allowed 
this to happen through neglect and perhaps an attitude that they should be 
punished for having committed the 'sin' of sex out of wedlock.  I have 
listened to too many stories of adoptees who have been battered, raped and 
psychologically abused by adoptive parents.

I think that all these issues need to be out on the table, need to be 
talked about, openly and honestly.  I know that my parents carry some kind 
of unresolved guilt because they have someone else's child.  I think that 
it's natural that these feelings would be there.  It becomes a problem when 
the feelings aren't dealt with.  These kinds of conversations are hard, 
painful, they tear at the heart and soul, they make the edges ragged for a 
while.  But if we don't talk about them, well we never have a chance to 
heal.  And I also think that even in the midst of silence and denial, the 
very nature of adoption creates these ragged edges in all of us: adoptees, 
birthparents and adoptive parents.  If we maintain the silence then there 
is never a possibility for healing to occur.

Laura