e-mail
Not someone I like giving attention, nonetheless this John Rosemond column was sent to me this morning, so I’ll give the link and an opinion or two.
Seems late in the game for such a self-proclaimed adoption “expert” to be getting the hang of appropriate language, but he seems to finally be grasping that tentative non-kinship custody, his term for open adoption, may rub people the wrong way.
Well, duh!
Rosemond says that open adoptions, “put the adoption at center stage and often interfere with the formation of family in the truest sense of the term,” and insists this will lead to teenage angst.
If I cared enough about what this guy thinks, I’d ask him for examples of un-angsty teens, adopted or not, open or closed, tall or short … whatever.
I am very curious about how Mr. Adoption Expert Dude got the gig he has, since apparently he’s featured in many papers and seems to have some credibility. Almost everything I’ve seen that he writes sounds like some flavor of tripe to me …
From Chicago comes a report of an open adoption that works very well.
On Mother’s Day the paper did a story on Anese Adams and Cynthia Rice, best friends who arranged for one to give birth for the other. Readers insisted there be an update, as many predicted the situation could not work. The twins that resulted are daughters to the adoptive mom, goddaughters to the birth mom, as the adoptive mom is godmother to her kids (Follow that?), and apparently all is going very well.
Adams, the birth mom says, “I have no misgivings at all. Cynthia is an unbelievably awesome mom, just as I knew she would be.”
A story from the UK comes from the opposite angle on birth parent / kid relationships and is quite painful to read.
Sophie Slavin winces as she recalls her first encounter with her natural father which came after an unexpected phone call on her 18th birthday. Adopted as a toddler, Sophie had often wondered about her biological parents. But any cosy images were shattered when she was finally reunited with her dad.
Far from being the life-affirming reunion she’d imagined, it was one of the strangest – and most unpleasant – days of her life.
More such stories are related, as well, and caveats issued to birth parents from a reunion mediator who says:
“Children are often adopted into more middle-class families than those into which they are born. That can make it much harder to develop a relationship, even though the birth family will be pleased that their child has enjoyed a better lifestyle.
“It’s a bad idea for birth parents to come crashing into an adopted child’s life as soon as they turn 18 and expect to be called Mum and Dad. A birth mum gives life, but it’s the adoptive mum who puts the plasters on grazed knees. It won’t feel right if the birth parent shows too much affection. After all, they are strangers and boundaries must be kept.”
Yeah, Rosemond’s “article” didn’t sit well with me at all.
People often assume that open adoptions are “active.” A friend of our family has an open adoption, but in 7 years the birth mother has made no contact, nor attended the meetings they had set up originally. She basically disappeared. Things aren’t always so cut and dry. Just like “closed” adoptions can be opened or partially open, or whatever.
L.
Rosemond’s opinions on adoption and even child rearing in general leave a lot to be desired in my opinion.
Lisa,
I’m not sure about closed adoptions being semi-open, but certainly there are as many variations on open adoption as there are families.
Disappearing birth parents presents a sad scenario that happens. It’s a violation of trust, but is more understandable, or forgivable, in my book than adoptive families changing the rules.