Today's prompt asks for the happiest moment of your life. Oh my smurf! How do you quantify that and pick only one moment?
I think most mothers would probably pick the birth(s) of their child(ren). Similarly, many people might expect that the days that the boys' adoptions were finalized might be mine. I can't say that, though. I was happy, most certainly. I wanted to be their mother so very much. But the joy of that day was tempered because while I gained that day, they lost. And no matter what the situations were, four sets of parents lost. Add to that that the finalizations were, because of the situations in foster care, the end of several years of stress for everyone. I guess it felt more like relief mixed with happiness.
Looking back, I just wouldn't pick one happiest moment. The happiest momentS for me? Are those silly, peaceful, loving moments with the boys that can happen at any time and are too numerous to count.
Showing posts with label adoption. Show all posts
Showing posts with label adoption. Show all posts
Friday, November 18, 2011
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Update November 2011
If you're reading this, you're awesome! Here's the promised update:
Cory: His back has seemingly FINALLY recovered and he's had a fantastic season with cross country. He's doing good in school. At 16 now, he's anxious to start driving lol. Mommy? Not so much. He turned out ot be my first case for stitches hehehe. I recently got a call from school that he'd chiseled his hand in wood shop and could I come take him to the ER? He's fine now, though.
Ty: He's doing great in school and had an AWESOME year for soccer and isn't too shabby at his first year of football, either.
Jay: He's doing well in school and has grown up so much since I last wrote. I'm so proud of him! He's just doing so well. He had a great year for soccer as well. He made a wicked good goalie!
Logan: He's an ace at school and is just plowing happily through life. He's currently sick but it's just strep throat and a round of antibiotics will have him fixed right up.
Me: Well, there's not much new here. I'm doing ok...plugging along, still looking for some sort of steady job.
We offically welcomed my niece Brittanie into the family Oct 17th. We love you, Brit!
There's not much in the way of actual news...we're just keeping on keeping on round here!
Cory: His back has seemingly FINALLY recovered and he's had a fantastic season with cross country. He's doing good in school. At 16 now, he's anxious to start driving lol. Mommy? Not so much. He turned out ot be my first case for stitches hehehe. I recently got a call from school that he'd chiseled his hand in wood shop and could I come take him to the ER? He's fine now, though.
Ty: He's doing great in school and had an AWESOME year for soccer and isn't too shabby at his first year of football, either.
Jay: He's doing well in school and has grown up so much since I last wrote. I'm so proud of him! He's just doing so well. He had a great year for soccer as well. He made a wicked good goalie!
Logan: He's an ace at school and is just plowing happily through life. He's currently sick but it's just strep throat and a round of antibiotics will have him fixed right up.
Me: Well, there's not much new here. I'm doing ok...plugging along, still looking for some sort of steady job.
We offically welcomed my niece Brittanie into the family Oct 17th. We love you, Brit!
There's not much in the way of actual news...we're just keeping on keeping on round here!
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Entitlement Part 2
There's a few things I'd like to add now on the topic, being calmer and have given some more thought on the issue.
Babies are NOT possessions to be fought over. It makes me sick when this happens, especially because some of the ones doing the most and the nastiest "fighting" are the very ones who are complaining that adoptive parents treat them as possessions that can be bought and sold. I have to include myself in this fighting to a point as I have sometimes (ahem...as in last night for one) given in to the insults and had my say. The best I can say about my behavior at these times is that it's always been defensive. Ya, I know. "You started it" is a poor excuse. I admit that.
What the mothers of loss who do this "on the offensive" need to understand is that their anger is more often misdirected than not. What do they hope to gain by insulting the general population of adoptive parents? They were insulted? Well, I'm sorry but I wasn't the one hurling those insults. Does it change the past to spew back the insults now? Do they really feel better? If so, WHY? It makes them no better than the people who treated them that way. They were called birthmothers and worse so now call us adopters? They were insulted when people told them the pregnancy was their fault so now infertility is automatically ours?
A couple of notes here. I am not judging anyone's choice to have sex before marriage. Most people do. If they were not treated with compassion while facing the consequences of that choice I am sorry. For me, though, it's a fact that every person who makes a choice has to deal with whatever might come next because of it. That's why teens shouldn't have sex in my opinion. This too isn't a judgement. It's an opinion based on the fact that most are not ready to deal with the potential consequences of it. Sex is for adults because it has potential adult consequences. Simple as that.
Anyway, now that I have that out of of my system I'll finish my thoughts on entitlement. Having a baby is a priviledge, not a right, for ANY parent. It makes no difference how you got to be a parent. No one is entitled to a baby. It happens that people who become parents through both conception and adoption sometimes get the priviledge of parenting without deserving it. Unless a "good parent detector" is invented that's not going to change. THOSE are the people who shouldn't get to be parents. I guess I could sum it up like this: good people who are or would be good parents deserve the chance to be parents.
Babies are NOT possessions to be fought over. It makes me sick when this happens, especially because some of the ones doing the most and the nastiest "fighting" are the very ones who are complaining that adoptive parents treat them as possessions that can be bought and sold. I have to include myself in this fighting to a point as I have sometimes (ahem...as in last night for one) given in to the insults and had my say. The best I can say about my behavior at these times is that it's always been defensive. Ya, I know. "You started it" is a poor excuse. I admit that.
What the mothers of loss who do this "on the offensive" need to understand is that their anger is more often misdirected than not. What do they hope to gain by insulting the general population of adoptive parents? They were insulted? Well, I'm sorry but I wasn't the one hurling those insults. Does it change the past to spew back the insults now? Do they really feel better? If so, WHY? It makes them no better than the people who treated them that way. They were called birthmothers and worse so now call us adopters? They were insulted when people told them the pregnancy was their fault so now infertility is automatically ours?
A couple of notes here. I am not judging anyone's choice to have sex before marriage. Most people do. If they were not treated with compassion while facing the consequences of that choice I am sorry. For me, though, it's a fact that every person who makes a choice has to deal with whatever might come next because of it. That's why teens shouldn't have sex in my opinion. This too isn't a judgement. It's an opinion based on the fact that most are not ready to deal with the potential consequences of it. Sex is for adults because it has potential adult consequences. Simple as that.
Anyway, now that I have that out of of my system I'll finish my thoughts on entitlement. Having a baby is a priviledge, not a right, for ANY parent. It makes no difference how you got to be a parent. No one is entitled to a baby. It happens that people who become parents through both conception and adoption sometimes get the priviledge of parenting without deserving it. Unless a "good parent detector" is invented that's not going to change. THOSE are the people who shouldn't get to be parents. I guess I could sum it up like this: good people who are or would be good parents deserve the chance to be parents.
Monday, February 1, 2010
Entitlement
Some people may not like this post. I don't care. I think I normally have a fairly progresssive and realsitic point of view about adoption but sometimes something just ticks me off and I have to vent about it. That's where I'm at. Please, bear it in mind while reading.
I've seen more entitlement talk around adoption blogs. It seems to crop up fairly regularly. Please note, I'd like to say AGAIN that I never felt entitled to a child but I am a good mother and deserve to be one as much as anyone else does.
The thing that makes me the angriest is when I'm told that I don't dseserve to be a mother because my infertility is my fault. First of all, it's not. It's a genetic issue no one had any control of. I've seen the primary causes of infertility cited and sure some of them are life choices. But you know what? So is having sex. So let's look at this a moment. There are several genetic and environmental causes of infertility that are NOT caused by a choice. There is only one, yes ONE, cause of pregnancy that is not a lifestyle choice. That obvioulsly is rape. When you compare the percentages of pregnancies caused by rape to the percentages of people who are infertile through no fault of their own, which do YOU want to bet is higher?
I'm sick of being told that infertility does not entitle anyone to a baby. It's not that I think it does. It's just that you know what? Neither does being being able to get pregnant.
I've seen more entitlement talk around adoption blogs. It seems to crop up fairly regularly. Please note, I'd like to say AGAIN that I never felt entitled to a child but I am a good mother and deserve to be one as much as anyone else does.
The thing that makes me the angriest is when I'm told that I don't dseserve to be a mother because my infertility is my fault. First of all, it's not. It's a genetic issue no one had any control of. I've seen the primary causes of infertility cited and sure some of them are life choices. But you know what? So is having sex. So let's look at this a moment. There are several genetic and environmental causes of infertility that are NOT caused by a choice. There is only one, yes ONE, cause of pregnancy that is not a lifestyle choice. That obvioulsly is rape. When you compare the percentages of pregnancies caused by rape to the percentages of people who are infertile through no fault of their own, which do YOU want to bet is higher?
I'm sick of being told that infertility does not entitle anyone to a baby. It's not that I think it does. It's just that you know what? Neither does being being able to get pregnant.
Sunday, November 29, 2009
The Gift
Many times in the adoption world the word gift is used. I've read that many adoptees and mothers of loss don't like this term in reference to adoption. I think they feel the word gift objectifies and devalues the adoptee and the pain both feel. I can understand that to a point but I think most adoptive parents don’t mean it that way. It comes down to a situation that causes emotions for all involved that are so very hard to put into words.
Let me try to explain to you what I mean when I say my boys are gifts. I think they are gifts of God given first to their other parents then to me through them. (That part is the same for me even though I adopted through foster care.) When most adoptive parents say they’ve been given a gift I don’t think they mean to imply that the baby is an object with a limited, though great, value. I think it’s more that we’ve been given what we wanted most in life, the chance to be a mother (or father). And you can’t put a price on that. In my opinion the word gift doesn't even begin to cover what that means but I can't think of a better one.
And here's where I get a little mad and insulted. Most “adopters” (ugh, I hate that word) appreciate that "gift" AT LEAST as much as any mom who gave birth. In general most people I think would agree that the more you go through to get something so important to you, the greater the appreciation you have for it. We went through as much, though in a totally different way, as those who gave birth. Let's be realistic. If we were talking about a posession instead of a child there wouldn’t be too many arguing over that. For example two men want Jags. One comes from a rich family and daddy buys it for him. The other works and saves most of his life and finally can afford to buy the car of his dreams. Who do you think appreciates the car more? And NO! I AM NOT CALLING A BABY A POSSESSION! Neither am I implying that it's about money. The exact opposite is actually my point. It's about the time, work, and emotion invested in the process. Because it IS a baby the emotions are infinitetly more intense and prevent the people involved from seeing this. Still, I dare say most of those moms who gave birth to their children feel that they are blessings or gifts too. They don't get taken to task for that. So it seems to me that mothers of loss and adoptees are implying that that blessing or gift has less meaning to us or that we deserve it less. Granted I’m assuming a little here but I don’t think it’s that much of a stretch. I’d be interested in responses from them, especially to set me straight if I’m wrong on either count. I don’t think that I was ”entitled” to any one woman’s child BUT I do think I deserved to be a mother. I never wanted my children at the cost of another woman’s pain but the fact is that SOME people DON’T deserve to be parents. Some of those people have kids anyway and those kids need homes. Are we worth so much less that we shouldn't be allowed to appreciate our children and our parenthood? Are our children not entitled to be treasured that way?
Let me try to explain to you what I mean when I say my boys are gifts. I think they are gifts of God given first to their other parents then to me through them. (That part is the same for me even though I adopted through foster care.) When most adoptive parents say they’ve been given a gift I don’t think they mean to imply that the baby is an object with a limited, though great, value. I think it’s more that we’ve been given what we wanted most in life, the chance to be a mother (or father). And you can’t put a price on that. In my opinion the word gift doesn't even begin to cover what that means but I can't think of a better one.
And here's where I get a little mad and insulted. Most “adopters” (ugh, I hate that word) appreciate that "gift" AT LEAST as much as any mom who gave birth. In general most people I think would agree that the more you go through to get something so important to you, the greater the appreciation you have for it. We went through as much, though in a totally different way, as those who gave birth. Let's be realistic. If we were talking about a posession instead of a child there wouldn’t be too many arguing over that. For example two men want Jags. One comes from a rich family and daddy buys it for him. The other works and saves most of his life and finally can afford to buy the car of his dreams. Who do you think appreciates the car more? And NO! I AM NOT CALLING A BABY A POSSESSION! Neither am I implying that it's about money. The exact opposite is actually my point. It's about the time, work, and emotion invested in the process. Because it IS a baby the emotions are infinitetly more intense and prevent the people involved from seeing this. Still, I dare say most of those moms who gave birth to their children feel that they are blessings or gifts too. They don't get taken to task for that. So it seems to me that mothers of loss and adoptees are implying that that blessing or gift has less meaning to us or that we deserve it less. Granted I’m assuming a little here but I don’t think it’s that much of a stretch. I’d be interested in responses from them, especially to set me straight if I’m wrong on either count. I don’t think that I was ”entitled” to any one woman’s child BUT I do think I deserved to be a mother. I never wanted my children at the cost of another woman’s pain but the fact is that SOME people DON’T deserve to be parents. Some of those people have kids anyway and those kids need homes. Are we worth so much less that we shouldn't be allowed to appreciate our children and our parenthood? Are our children not entitled to be treasured that way?
Monday, November 23, 2009
Fear
Mulling around ideas on what to post about tonight I was thinking about what I'm afraid of. I'm not sure where that came from but here I am anyway. I'm not scared of spiders, mice, or snakes. Bees, wasps, or hornets, though? I'm a shaking pile of mush. I get goosebumps just thinking about them. That's a phobia, though, and not really my GREATEST fear.
So what would that be? I'd say without hesitation that it's losing the boys. I'm sure that's MOST parents' biggest fear but I think mine is heightened by all the time I spent *knowing they may not stay with me. It was over a year in limbo for Ty and Cory and well over two for Jay and Logan. All that time spent in the power of the judge and caseworkers, never knowing when I might get a call that for whatever reason the boys would be going. Even now, a month after being freed from that for good, I'm not totally over feeling that way. It'll ease over time I'm sure. I'll get used to knowing that they're here and safe and that no one else has power over our home and relationships anymore. But for now? My heart still skips a beat sometimes when the phone rings or the dog barks when I'm not expecting someone. I think it's a mild form of PTSD for me actually. I spent, most recently, two years consistantly worrying about Jay and Logan returning to a VERY bad home situation. It only makes sense that it will take my body some time to adjust to the absence of that stress. In the meantime I intend to enjoy my sons and have as normal a life as we possibly can.
*I am NOT debating whether or not they SHOULD have gone home. I did my level best to help Ty's mom get him back, Cory's parents had lost their rights before I met him, and it was blantantly obvious to me early on that it would be very dangerous for Jay and Logan if they went home. I know these things to be fact. Anyone disputing them doesn't have a leg to stand on because that person couldn't know the situations and honestly argue against what I've just said.
So what would that be? I'd say without hesitation that it's losing the boys. I'm sure that's MOST parents' biggest fear but I think mine is heightened by all the time I spent *knowing they may not stay with me. It was over a year in limbo for Ty and Cory and well over two for Jay and Logan. All that time spent in the power of the judge and caseworkers, never knowing when I might get a call that for whatever reason the boys would be going. Even now, a month after being freed from that for good, I'm not totally over feeling that way. It'll ease over time I'm sure. I'll get used to knowing that they're here and safe and that no one else has power over our home and relationships anymore. But for now? My heart still skips a beat sometimes when the phone rings or the dog barks when I'm not expecting someone. I think it's a mild form of PTSD for me actually. I spent, most recently, two years consistantly worrying about Jay and Logan returning to a VERY bad home situation. It only makes sense that it will take my body some time to adjust to the absence of that stress. In the meantime I intend to enjoy my sons and have as normal a life as we possibly can.
*I am NOT debating whether or not they SHOULD have gone home. I did my level best to help Ty's mom get him back, Cory's parents had lost their rights before I met him, and it was blantantly obvious to me early on that it would be very dangerous for Jay and Logan if they went home. I know these things to be fact. Anyone disputing them doesn't have a leg to stand on because that person couldn't know the situations and honestly argue against what I've just said.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Permanancy in Foster Care
*My usual disclaimer...please read the title and note that I'm referring totally to foster care adoption here. So no panties in a twist, please.
I've been thinking about this for quite some time. I've read on several blogs of mothers of loss and adoptees that adoption should just be done away with completely. They feel a child who can't be cared for by his/her parents should go to extended family. I don't disagree with this at all in theory. I think that's the best case scenario. However, especially when we are dealing with the reality of TRUE fostercare cases (i.e. abuse or neglect and not youth or poverty), that just often isn't an option. For example, extended family members were looked at in all four of my boys' cases and it just wouldn't have worked out. In fact two of the boys WERE placed with extended family. One of them was "voluntarily" returned to care because the family member "couldn't handle him" and the other was removed due to severe abuse and neglect at the hands of the family member. I'll grant that this is a grossly small sample but still rather telling just the same.
Ok. I don't think there's anyone who can dispute that sometimes family is NOT an option. So what then? I truly believe that children need a sense of belonging, of permanacy. I can't imagine not knowing when you get up in the morning if you'll be going to sleep in the same bed that night. Not to mention what the feeling that no one wants you must do to a person's self-esteem. So I guess that means remaining in care isn't such a great choice. Actually, I think foster care should only be used while reunification is being attempted or until an appropriate permanent situation can be found if reunification fails.
So, next? Maybe permanent legal guardianship? I think that's an option but I'm not sure that's better or worse than legal adoption. In some cases, the kids might need to KNOW that their parents' rights have been terminated and there's no chance they'll be returning to that situation. Jay and Logan did. They were literally in pretty serious danger while with their parents. They are still scared of them, to the point of having nightmares that they come to kill us or take them. Also, some kids might need the unity of having the same last name to get a sense of belonging to their new family. I know I gave all four of my sons the choice and they all CHOSE to change or add my last name to theirs. Two of them kept their names completely the same and just added mine. The other two dropped their original last name entirely. Those same two actually changed more as well...Jay changed his name from Julian to Jay (our family nickname for him) and Cory changed his middle name. They both ASKED to make those changes. I didn't even suggest them in either case. I also know being officially adopted has helped them all to know that they are here with a family that loves and wants them forever. They don't have to wake up tomorrow and wonder where they'll be moved to next. I'm not sure about this last point (if anyone knows please feel free to leave a comment about this) so I may do some research on it and post more about it later. Does the child in a legal guardianship have the same rights that a legally recognized child of that guardian would have? Does that leave a child in that situation without parents or a family when he/she becomes a legal adult? Legal guardianship stops at 18 or 21, right? So who does that leave for a person whose parents' rights were terminated by the court due to abuse/neglect so that the child could have permanancy? Maybe this wouldn't be a big deal to most but I just can't imagine having no legally recognized parents.
I know that there are adoptees who felt that they couldn't be themselves growing up in a family they weren't genetically linked to. My first response to this is...SHAME ON ANY FAMILIES that caused a child to feel that way! I've posted before about "mini-me's" and expecting a child to be like the parents. That's just wrong in ANY family, whether biological or adopted. "Fitting in" should be a matter of being loved for who you are, not changing yourself to be like others just to gain acceptance. However, I think adoptive parents should accept that the losses caused by adoption might lead to these feelings and they should be prepared to help their children through this while they're growing up. Their differences should be accepted, even celebrated, and original families/heritage should be respected.
I'll admit I'm just a mom with a blog. I'm not an expert with all the answers but I just can't see how making my boys a permanent, legal part of my family is a bad thing as long as I don't negate their original families in the process. I know some will say changing their last name does that but like I said it was their choice and for me it was about including them in my family not getting rid of their original family.
I've been thinking about this for quite some time. I've read on several blogs of mothers of loss and adoptees that adoption should just be done away with completely. They feel a child who can't be cared for by his/her parents should go to extended family. I don't disagree with this at all in theory. I think that's the best case scenario. However, especially when we are dealing with the reality of TRUE fostercare cases (i.e. abuse or neglect and not youth or poverty), that just often isn't an option. For example, extended family members were looked at in all four of my boys' cases and it just wouldn't have worked out. In fact two of the boys WERE placed with extended family. One of them was "voluntarily" returned to care because the family member "couldn't handle him" and the other was removed due to severe abuse and neglect at the hands of the family member. I'll grant that this is a grossly small sample but still rather telling just the same.
Ok. I don't think there's anyone who can dispute that sometimes family is NOT an option. So what then? I truly believe that children need a sense of belonging, of permanacy. I can't imagine not knowing when you get up in the morning if you'll be going to sleep in the same bed that night. Not to mention what the feeling that no one wants you must do to a person's self-esteem. So I guess that means remaining in care isn't such a great choice. Actually, I think foster care should only be used while reunification is being attempted or until an appropriate permanent situation can be found if reunification fails.
So, next? Maybe permanent legal guardianship? I think that's an option but I'm not sure that's better or worse than legal adoption. In some cases, the kids might need to KNOW that their parents' rights have been terminated and there's no chance they'll be returning to that situation. Jay and Logan did. They were literally in pretty serious danger while with their parents. They are still scared of them, to the point of having nightmares that they come to kill us or take them. Also, some kids might need the unity of having the same last name to get a sense of belonging to their new family. I know I gave all four of my sons the choice and they all CHOSE to change or add my last name to theirs. Two of them kept their names completely the same and just added mine. The other two dropped their original last name entirely. Those same two actually changed more as well...Jay changed his name from Julian to Jay (our family nickname for him) and Cory changed his middle name. They both ASKED to make those changes. I didn't even suggest them in either case. I also know being officially adopted has helped them all to know that they are here with a family that loves and wants them forever. They don't have to wake up tomorrow and wonder where they'll be moved to next. I'm not sure about this last point (if anyone knows please feel free to leave a comment about this) so I may do some research on it and post more about it later. Does the child in a legal guardianship have the same rights that a legally recognized child of that guardian would have? Does that leave a child in that situation without parents or a family when he/she becomes a legal adult? Legal guardianship stops at 18 or 21, right? So who does that leave for a person whose parents' rights were terminated by the court due to abuse/neglect so that the child could have permanancy? Maybe this wouldn't be a big deal to most but I just can't imagine having no legally recognized parents.
I know that there are adoptees who felt that they couldn't be themselves growing up in a family they weren't genetically linked to. My first response to this is...SHAME ON ANY FAMILIES that caused a child to feel that way! I've posted before about "mini-me's" and expecting a child to be like the parents. That's just wrong in ANY family, whether biological or adopted. "Fitting in" should be a matter of being loved for who you are, not changing yourself to be like others just to gain acceptance. However, I think adoptive parents should accept that the losses caused by adoption might lead to these feelings and they should be prepared to help their children through this while they're growing up. Their differences should be accepted, even celebrated, and original families/heritage should be respected.
I'll admit I'm just a mom with a blog. I'm not an expert with all the answers but I just can't see how making my boys a permanent, legal part of my family is a bad thing as long as I don't negate their original families in the process. I know some will say changing their last name does that but like I said it was their choice and for me it was about including them in my family not getting rid of their original family.
Monday, December 8, 2008
A Rant
Head's up: This post is going to be quite the vent I think. Life with the case, and with J especially, has been stressful lately. The whys of that have led me to a very hurt and angry place right now. You're going to see both those things if you read on. And because I can't get TOO detailed about J or the case (or especially the CPS)the anger will out more.
I'm hurt and broken hearted right now. J has been displaying some unsafe and destructive behaviors as a result of his past. It's been pretty much on-going but has been getting worse recently. Some of you don't know this but the judge recently ordered visits be resumed with J and L's family but ONLY with L. (This is what I mentioned in a previouos post that might cause backsliding.) And it seems it has. These things might mean he can't stay here anymore. It's that serious and that close to the edge. He might NEVER be able to overcome the obstacles these issues and behaviors are causing him. I am so scared for what lies ahead for him and devastated to think of losing him because of this.
I'm going to go into a bit of detail here to make what I think is a very important point. J's problems are due to abuse he suffered at the hands of his family. It started with his parents and when they were done they passed him around until he ended in his grandfather's care for almost 3 years. Where he was TORTURED on a regular basis during that time. Given this I don't ever want to be told that adoption is not an option again. That there aren't some times when it IS the best choice. I'm sick of it. He stayed with his family for 6 years and look what it got him. Do you think he gives a rat's arse that they look like him, walk like him, have this talent or that like him? The kind of people they are he'd have been better off not knowing.
I know that there are parents and adoptees out there who will bring up the fact that he might have been abused in an adoptive home too. Some would intimate or even come out and say that foster or adovitve parents are MORE likely to abuse. For all I've read that nonsense on some blogs I have never seen one statistic to back it up. As my friend Kathy has said...people are people and no matter how you come to a family they aren't going to be perfect. Foster/adoptive parents are no different that way. In this case, though, his parents knew their own limits and what options they had among family (apparently none). So...the family is always best argument is DONE. FINISHED. THE END.
Another thing I'm tired of hearing is that God doesn't want us "Infertiles" to have children and that's why we can't. Really? That's the best ya got? The way I see it if only the people that were supposed to have children could there would be no need for adoption or abortion because there would be no abuse, neglect, or unwanted children. Every child would be born into a family who was willing and able to parent him or her.
I guess I'm ranted out but just let me say that I don't believe that parents who place are going to abuse their children if they don't. I already said I don't think either type of parent is more prone to that. The whole point I was trying to make is that adoption IS necessary. In a perfect world it wouldn't be. In an almost perfect world only those parents who should NOT have children would place them (and that would never be to abusive parents.) Anyway, that adoption is necessary is FACT. Those negatively affected by it can deny it til they're blue in the face but there it is...pure and simple.
I'm hurt and broken hearted right now. J has been displaying some unsafe and destructive behaviors as a result of his past. It's been pretty much on-going but has been getting worse recently. Some of you don't know this but the judge recently ordered visits be resumed with J and L's family but ONLY with L. (This is what I mentioned in a previouos post that might cause backsliding.) And it seems it has. These things might mean he can't stay here anymore. It's that serious and that close to the edge. He might NEVER be able to overcome the obstacles these issues and behaviors are causing him. I am so scared for what lies ahead for him and devastated to think of losing him because of this.
I'm going to go into a bit of detail here to make what I think is a very important point. J's problems are due to abuse he suffered at the hands of his family. It started with his parents and when they were done they passed him around until he ended in his grandfather's care for almost 3 years. Where he was TORTURED on a regular basis during that time. Given this I don't ever want to be told that adoption is not an option again. That there aren't some times when it IS the best choice. I'm sick of it. He stayed with his family for 6 years and look what it got him. Do you think he gives a rat's arse that they look like him, walk like him, have this talent or that like him? The kind of people they are he'd have been better off not knowing.
I know that there are parents and adoptees out there who will bring up the fact that he might have been abused in an adoptive home too. Some would intimate or even come out and say that foster or adovitve parents are MORE likely to abuse. For all I've read that nonsense on some blogs I have never seen one statistic to back it up. As my friend Kathy has said...people are people and no matter how you come to a family they aren't going to be perfect. Foster/adoptive parents are no different that way. In this case, though, his parents knew their own limits and what options they had among family (apparently none). So...the family is always best argument is DONE. FINISHED. THE END.
Another thing I'm tired of hearing is that God doesn't want us "Infertiles" to have children and that's why we can't. Really? That's the best ya got? The way I see it if only the people that were supposed to have children could there would be no need for adoption or abortion because there would be no abuse, neglect, or unwanted children. Every child would be born into a family who was willing and able to parent him or her.
I guess I'm ranted out but just let me say that I don't believe that parents who place are going to abuse their children if they don't. I already said I don't think either type of parent is more prone to that. The whole point I was trying to make is that adoption IS necessary. In a perfect world it wouldn't be. In an almost perfect world only those parents who should NOT have children would place them (and that would never be to abusive parents.) Anyway, that adoption is necessary is FACT. Those negatively affected by it can deny it til they're blue in the face but there it is...pure and simple.
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Mini Me's???
I have yet another adoption bone to pick, so to speak. I haven't seen this complaint recently but I've seen it often enough in the past and it's always bugged me. What is it? That adoptive parents expect carbon copies of themselves in their kids. So...of course their children don't feel free to be who they are, which of course is automatically different than the parents because there's no genetic link. Yeah, right. I think that is completely ridiculous! There is no guarantee of having a child that looks or acts like you, likes the same things as you, or has the same talents as you even if he or she IS your biological child. I would not expect that of ANY child of mine. Any parent who would...well, imo that's just bad parenting.
All four of the boys have some similarities to me. Tyler is very particular about things just like me (ok, ok...we probably both have OCD. But just a little lol.) I had to laugh on our first Christmas together. He set up the nativity set and SO proudly asked, "Did I do a good job? It looks just like it does on the box." Sure enough it did lol and that was SO something I would've done, especially as a kid. I use each boys' talents and interests that match mine to strengthen our relationships. For example Cory loves to cook as much as I do so he often helps me in the kitchen and we have fun and a lot of great talks then. Jay is my little bookworm so we read together and talk about books a lot. But don't all good parents do that? Spend time with their kids doing what they both enjoy doing?
On the flip side I also accept and enjoy my boys for who they are, including their differences. Cory and Ty love rap music for example. It's probably the one genre of music I can't get into. At all. Ah, but do I tell them they can't listen to it? Nope. It's hard becuase so much of rap is inappropriate for kids but as long as the song isn't violent or explicit I'm ok with it. Ty's taste in clothes is NOTHING like mine. It's totally West Coast choppers, flames, and the like. I don't buy him, or any of the boys for that matter, clothes they don't pick out. I have the last word in appropriateness of course but it's all clothes they have chosen. So yeah I let them express themselves. And I spend time doing things they like that I may not, like watching football with Ty. I don't pick the sports they play or clubs they join. They tell me when they're interested and if it's possible they join. I HATE the cold but every year I go watch the boys ski. But again isn't that what a good parent does? Encourage their kids in what they're good at and enjoy even if the parents aren't or don't?
When I began the process of fostering and adopting I never signed on for a carbon copy of myself. Never expected it. I just assumed that we'd be alike in some ways, different in others. A relationship like I have with my mom and dad...enjoying our similarities but respecting our differences, and know what? Enjoying them too.
All four of the boys have some similarities to me. Tyler is very particular about things just like me (ok, ok...we probably both have OCD. But just a little lol.) I had to laugh on our first Christmas together. He set up the nativity set and SO proudly asked, "Did I do a good job? It looks just like it does on the box." Sure enough it did lol and that was SO something I would've done, especially as a kid. I use each boys' talents and interests that match mine to strengthen our relationships. For example Cory loves to cook as much as I do so he often helps me in the kitchen and we have fun and a lot of great talks then. Jay is my little bookworm so we read together and talk about books a lot. But don't all good parents do that? Spend time with their kids doing what they both enjoy doing?
On the flip side I also accept and enjoy my boys for who they are, including their differences. Cory and Ty love rap music for example. It's probably the one genre of music I can't get into. At all. Ah, but do I tell them they can't listen to it? Nope. It's hard becuase so much of rap is inappropriate for kids but as long as the song isn't violent or explicit I'm ok with it. Ty's taste in clothes is NOTHING like mine. It's totally West Coast choppers, flames, and the like. I don't buy him, or any of the boys for that matter, clothes they don't pick out. I have the last word in appropriateness of course but it's all clothes they have chosen. So yeah I let them express themselves. And I spend time doing things they like that I may not, like watching football with Ty. I don't pick the sports they play or clubs they join. They tell me when they're interested and if it's possible they join. I HATE the cold but every year I go watch the boys ski. But again isn't that what a good parent does? Encourage their kids in what they're good at and enjoy even if the parents aren't or don't?
When I began the process of fostering and adopting I never signed on for a carbon copy of myself. Never expected it. I just assumed that we'd be alike in some ways, different in others. A relationship like I have with my mom and dad...enjoying our similarities but respecting our differences, and know what? Enjoying them too.
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
The Name Game
As long as adoption exists so will the quandry of what to call the people involved. Today I read another complaint about the term birth mother. When I was new to adoption I used this term. To me it meant a mother who had placed her child for adoption, no insult intended. It was a frame of reference only, a way to distinguish between mothers in adoptive situations. I've since come to understand that many of those mothers were offended by the term, often citing that they felt it limited the importance of their role in their child(ren)'s life. Given what I know now about coercion and marketing in adoption I can respect their feelings on the matter. I've used the term in the past but as I said before as a frame of reference only. I've never used the term in reference to my sons' mothers in front of them. If I am speaking to them regarding their mom I SAY "your mom." They know who I mean and they know that I'm their mom too.
I've spoken about a little about this before but I felt the need to bring it up again. The reason is that while I can understand this mother's (whose blog I read today) reasons for NOT wanting to be called birth mother, it hurt that in the same blog post she called adoptive parents adopters. Then she wondered why we object to the term. I'd like to answer that here, although I am unconvinced she doesn't really already understand since it's basically the same reason they object to the term birthmother. I feel the term adopter does, and is meant to by at least some of the mothers who insist on using it, denigrate OUR roles in the lives of our children. I'm NOT an adopter. I adopted and now I'm a mother. It's as simple as that. And while I'm on the topic (a little bit at least)..."as born to" DOES exist. I've heard it said that no paper (meaning tpr) can change that and I AGREE totally with that. Time, good parenting, and love however CAN. It does this without severing the bond that the child will always have with his/her parents and their families. But it DOES exist. I would die for my boys, sacrifice anything that was mine to give. It's a mother's love for her sons. Plain and simple. Do they miss or cry for their mothers too? Yes. And I let them. I talk to them, look at pictures with them. I do what I can to acknowledge their loss and help them work through it. That's what a mother does no matter what her child is hurting about. So don't tell me (or my boys btw because they'd be the first to disagree with you) that I can't love them like they were born to me or that I'm not their mother.
It basically comes down to no one group's agenda is ever going to be heard, no change ever instituted in adoption as long as all we do is fling insults at each other and refuse to hear one another. It weakens every argument, every otherwise valid point of view. I'm tired of the insults and the pettiness. On all, yes ALL, sides. If you want to get justice for the violation of your rights in separating you from your baby, if you want your original records unsealed, or if you want reform in adoption it's time to grow up and focus on THAT. Stop taking your issues out on each other and either work together or at least learn to live and let live.
I've spoken about a little about this before but I felt the need to bring it up again. The reason is that while I can understand this mother's (whose blog I read today) reasons for NOT wanting to be called birth mother, it hurt that in the same blog post she called adoptive parents adopters. Then she wondered why we object to the term. I'd like to answer that here, although I am unconvinced she doesn't really already understand since it's basically the same reason they object to the term birthmother. I feel the term adopter does, and is meant to by at least some of the mothers who insist on using it, denigrate OUR roles in the lives of our children. I'm NOT an adopter. I adopted and now I'm a mother. It's as simple as that. And while I'm on the topic (a little bit at least)..."as born to" DOES exist. I've heard it said that no paper (meaning tpr) can change that and I AGREE totally with that. Time, good parenting, and love however CAN. It does this without severing the bond that the child will always have with his/her parents and their families. But it DOES exist. I would die for my boys, sacrifice anything that was mine to give. It's a mother's love for her sons. Plain and simple. Do they miss or cry for their mothers too? Yes. And I let them. I talk to them, look at pictures with them. I do what I can to acknowledge their loss and help them work through it. That's what a mother does no matter what her child is hurting about. So don't tell me (or my boys btw because they'd be the first to disagree with you) that I can't love them like they were born to me or that I'm not their mother.
It basically comes down to no one group's agenda is ever going to be heard, no change ever instituted in adoption as long as all we do is fling insults at each other and refuse to hear one another. It weakens every argument, every otherwise valid point of view. I'm tired of the insults and the pettiness. On all, yes ALL, sides. If you want to get justice for the violation of your rights in separating you from your baby, if you want your original records unsealed, or if you want reform in adoption it's time to grow up and focus on THAT. Stop taking your issues out on each other and either work together or at least learn to live and let live.
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
Up on My Adoption Soapbox (Again)
Something I read today on an adoption forum I frequent prompted some thoughts that I feel the need to get out. Before I continue I would like to emphasize again that my experiences with adoption have been in regard to older child adoption through foster care. I believe that domestic, newborn adoption is a very valid (though currently also very corrupt) option for some expecting parents. I also believe that those parents should not ever be pressured into making a decision in ANY direction. The decision should only be made by the parent(s), hopefully in an environment of honest support (as in we'll get you through this time NO MATTER which road you choose). Having clarified that I'll go on with what this post is really about...the foster care system.
A friend of mine is working with a young girl currently in foster care. As part of her job she has become aware of some of this young lady's home situation and it's not good. She honestly believes in keeping the family together whenever possible but wonders where that line should be drawn. I've been real close to this dilemma lately because of the situation with J and L and some things that went on with the case. I really feel that families should be kept together as much as possible but I still feel that the interests of the children should come before the family (which really most often reads as the adults in the family). The adults don't need protecting but the children in these situations do. As I mentioned before this pertains only to parents in the foster care system. An expectant parent who is considering placing a child for adoption for whatever reason DOES deserve and need the protection, support, and resources to make any decisions about their options.
It infuriates me that in these cases the children pay the price of preserving the family at all costs. At what point do we say the family is not worth the cost of a child languishing in care for far too long or returning to an unsafe situation? I'll admit I don't know the answer to this, at least in part because I'm too close to this problem. I honestly know that J and L can NOT go home because I believe the things they've told me and I know the history there (which extends far beyond even just the 2 of them). Can these parents really change? How many chances to seriously mess up and with how many children should these people get? How long should parents get to work out their problems while their children wait, wonder, and worry in care? When is enough enough already?
Like I said before I don't have the answers. I wish I did for the children's sake (and yes for the family's sake). What I'd like to see is all the help possible provided to these parents so that they can keep their family together. The only reason for removal of children should be that the resources provided do not alleviate the problems OR if the situation is so problematic that the child(ren)'s safety is not assured. Oh wait! This IS what's supposed to happen and when it works it's wonderful. The glitch in this policy is this: there are parents who can't or won't use the resources to honestly change. I think if it gets to the point (for either reason I mentioned) that children need to be removed, the parents should have to work hard and fast to prove that they can safely parent these children. 12 months or more seems too long in my opinion, especially when considering that most of these families have been offered services that could keep their family together for quite some time BEFORE the kids were removed. If the parents can't successfully learn to parent with those supports before the children are removed they shouldn't have much time after. They should have some time, yes, because actually realizing how close they are to losing their kids can force them to get it together. I think though that if that's going to happen it'll show relatively quickly in the parents' actions and cooperation.
What about severe cases? "Aggravated circumstances" cover what counts as reasons to remove children and not have to work with the family to reunify. The problem? I've seen first hand where this is totally ignored and children suffer for it. It's supposed to protect the children in dire situations but how can it do that if it's not used because people are trying to maintain family? Some people might argue with the use of "aggravated circumstances," citing "preserve the family at all costs" as a basis for that stance. Preserving the family is a very admirable and necessary goal but as I've said before I disagree with that mantra when it's the children paying the price. My stand on this issue is that if parents have gotten to the point where the conditions for "aggravated circumstances" are met, they probably don't deserve more time anyway. I say probably to acknowledge that there are exceptions to this (but believe they are probably few and far between).
There is a price that the children in foster care pay no matter what happens (issues from time spent in care even if they return to a good situation, returning to a bad situation, or issues from losing the parents forever even if it was the best choice among horrid options). It's time adults stop using the all holy family as a blanket defense to avoid the consequences of THEIR actions that put the children in the situation in the first place. It's time to put the kids, not family, first. The family is not a living person, children are. THEY are what matters. Yes it's important to consider the pain and issues that arise from losing family but only by looking at what is best for the children in each whole situation can we say whether that family should be preserved.
A friend of mine is working with a young girl currently in foster care. As part of her job she has become aware of some of this young lady's home situation and it's not good. She honestly believes in keeping the family together whenever possible but wonders where that line should be drawn. I've been real close to this dilemma lately because of the situation with J and L and some things that went on with the case. I really feel that families should be kept together as much as possible but I still feel that the interests of the children should come before the family (which really most often reads as the adults in the family). The adults don't need protecting but the children in these situations do. As I mentioned before this pertains only to parents in the foster care system. An expectant parent who is considering placing a child for adoption for whatever reason DOES deserve and need the protection, support, and resources to make any decisions about their options.
It infuriates me that in these cases the children pay the price of preserving the family at all costs. At what point do we say the family is not worth the cost of a child languishing in care for far too long or returning to an unsafe situation? I'll admit I don't know the answer to this, at least in part because I'm too close to this problem. I honestly know that J and L can NOT go home because I believe the things they've told me and I know the history there (which extends far beyond even just the 2 of them). Can these parents really change? How many chances to seriously mess up and with how many children should these people get? How long should parents get to work out their problems while their children wait, wonder, and worry in care? When is enough enough already?
Like I said before I don't have the answers. I wish I did for the children's sake (and yes for the family's sake). What I'd like to see is all the help possible provided to these parents so that they can keep their family together. The only reason for removal of children should be that the resources provided do not alleviate the problems OR if the situation is so problematic that the child(ren)'s safety is not assured. Oh wait! This IS what's supposed to happen and when it works it's wonderful. The glitch in this policy is this: there are parents who can't or won't use the resources to honestly change. I think if it gets to the point (for either reason I mentioned) that children need to be removed, the parents should have to work hard and fast to prove that they can safely parent these children. 12 months or more seems too long in my opinion, especially when considering that most of these families have been offered services that could keep their family together for quite some time BEFORE the kids were removed. If the parents can't successfully learn to parent with those supports before the children are removed they shouldn't have much time after. They should have some time, yes, because actually realizing how close they are to losing their kids can force them to get it together. I think though that if that's going to happen it'll show relatively quickly in the parents' actions and cooperation.
What about severe cases? "Aggravated circumstances" cover what counts as reasons to remove children and not have to work with the family to reunify. The problem? I've seen first hand where this is totally ignored and children suffer for it. It's supposed to protect the children in dire situations but how can it do that if it's not used because people are trying to maintain family? Some people might argue with the use of "aggravated circumstances," citing "preserve the family at all costs" as a basis for that stance. Preserving the family is a very admirable and necessary goal but as I've said before I disagree with that mantra when it's the children paying the price. My stand on this issue is that if parents have gotten to the point where the conditions for "aggravated circumstances" are met, they probably don't deserve more time anyway. I say probably to acknowledge that there are exceptions to this (but believe they are probably few and far between).
There is a price that the children in foster care pay no matter what happens (issues from time spent in care even if they return to a good situation, returning to a bad situation, or issues from losing the parents forever even if it was the best choice among horrid options). It's time adults stop using the all holy family as a blanket defense to avoid the consequences of THEIR actions that put the children in the situation in the first place. It's time to put the kids, not family, first. The family is not a living person, children are. THEY are what matters. Yes it's important to consider the pain and issues that arise from losing family but only by looking at what is best for the children in each whole situation can we say whether that family should be preserved.
Monday, June 16, 2008
My Scariest Moment
This is the second thing Cam tagged me to do. Not that I mind....it's kinda fun but this one is HARD. How did you pin down your scariest moment?
My scariest moment? Probably when the cw told me that I wouldn't be allowed to adopt Cory. They'd called and beggged me to take him for respite then long-term fc. He'd already been to and left 3 OTHER homes and they were going to make him move again after 6 months with me when his parents had already had their rights terminated? For him to go to an adoptive home where he knew no one? I didn't think so. Well, it worked out but I remember not being able to breathe when I heard that.
My scariest moment? Probably when the cw told me that I wouldn't be allowed to adopt Cory. They'd called and beggged me to take him for respite then long-term fc. He'd already been to and left 3 OTHER homes and they were going to make him move again after 6 months with me when his parents had already had their rights terminated? For him to go to an adoptive home where he knew no one? I didn't think so. Well, it worked out but I remember not being able to breathe when I heard that.
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Someone's Toes May Get Stepped On...
but mine were first!
Mother's day this year was a time for reflection for me. I'd never been to this place in my life before. This year I'm happy and secure as a mom to my 4 boys. Yes, 4. How can I include J and L? Well, they're my sons. For right here and now, whether they stay or go, they need that. And deserve it. Still, that could be a whole other post and this post wasn't going to be about that. Or exactly that, anyway. So back on track. Always before Mother's day has been about honoring my mom, dealing with the hurt the day caused me before I had the boys, or shoving my head in the sand just being in shock that I WAS a mom. This year I enjoyed my kids. I really did. But there was more. I spent a lot of my free time reading blogs (a new obsession). They were mainly adoption related and many were the blogs of parents who had placed or adoptees. Reading these blogs, and a call to Ty's mom on Mother's Day, triggered a lot of thinking on my part.
I understand that placing a child for adoption is losing a child. It doesn't matter if that child was involuntarily removed by a government agency (put first here ONLY because it's the situation for me and my boys), placed voluntarily after deciding it was the best decision to make in a bad situation with no GOOD choice, or placed "voluntarily" due to coercion. It still has to hurt. I can't honestly say I know what these parents go through but I can get a small idea. I dealt with the pain of wanting children and knowing how hard it would be for me to do that from the time I was 14 years old. I've dealt with nearly 2.5 years in all of fear and pain at the thought of losing first Ty and Cory and now J and L. Is it the same? No, of course not. Is it worse than what a parent who placed feels? No, I don't imagine it is. Is it a solid base to allow me to have compassion for what that parent has suffered? Yes, it is.
Another thing I've thought about these last few days is how much the system needs to be changed. How? God, I wish I knew. The only thing I DO know is that there'll always be corruption in it as long as it's allowed to be a business. Until that changes parents (both through birth and adoption) and adoptees will continue to "pay" for it. Dearly. But from foster care to private adoptions it needs to be overhauled for sure. Still, some of what I've read scares me. I've read posts that sound like adoption shouldn't even be an option. Faults and all, the truth is that adoption works sometimes. Is a necessary choice sometimes.
I read in several different places how domestic infant adoptions have decreased since abortion was legalized and women began to have more options that allowed them to parent. About abortion...I'm not going to debate my beliefs on that here in this post. What I WILL say is that it's still losing a child and that many women who have chosen that route have suffered emotionally because of that choice as well. What I did NOT read in any of the same places is that while d.i. adoptions may have decreased, the incidences of child abuse and neglect and the number of children in foster care have increased. That is NOT an implied slur on young, poor, or unmarried parents or expectant parents. I do NOT believe that they are any more likely to be abusive, neglectful parents than parents who adopted. I point it out simply to show that adoption in some form continues to be necessary. I'm stressing this because it sounded to me like some wanted to do away with it completely. Major reform? Again and again....YES! To take it away totally? I don't think that's an option. There is corruption in every sector of adoption: greedy, unethical agencies; manipulative, dishonest aparents; and bparents who are out to scam. That doesn't mean that EVERY agency, aparent, or bparent is that way. Nor does it mean that adoption is inherently wrong and evil. I guess it's like this. Even if placing was the best choice in your situation, you still have the right to grieve. If you were one of the countless parents that didn't have a choice or were coerced into the placement you have the right to be pissed off and get some justice. In fact, I hope you do. But I don't understand how you can accept taking that choice away when you see what being denied a choice did to you? Adoption IS a valid choice if every person facing an unplanned pregnancy is presented with all their options in an unbiased way and allowed to make the choice that is best for them. Whatever reform in adoption may look like, that's where it needs to end up in my opinion.
The last thing I noticed while reading was the use of the word natural mother in some blogs. I wonder, like every adoptive parent who has come across the term, what that makes me? What made me angry was that in some places I saw the term it was used not to empower or respect mothers but to degrade amoms. As in: we are NOT mothers. On that I beg to differ. I take care of my kids when they're sick, help them with their schoolwork, comfort them when they're scared, meet their basic needs, and I could go on and on. What other term is there for that? Ask my sons who I am...they know. I have lots of friends who've adopted...ask any one of their kids who that person who has taken care of them is. Does that have to make you a less important part of your child's life? Not at all. Not less, just different. Ask my sons that too. They know they have 2 moms and that they're allowed to love us both. It didn't take away any of the love I had for Ty or Cory as we added to our family. If I can love more than one child, why can't they love both their moms? I'm guessing it's hurt and anger that makes some parents act that way but I didn't cause your hurt. So put your anger and hurt where it rightfully belongs in your situation and leave the rest of us out of it. I am my 4 boys' mom and I won't feel guilty about it.
Mother's day this year was a time for reflection for me. I'd never been to this place in my life before. This year I'm happy and secure as a mom to my 4 boys. Yes, 4. How can I include J and L? Well, they're my sons. For right here and now, whether they stay or go, they need that. And deserve it. Still, that could be a whole other post and this post wasn't going to be about that. Or exactly that, anyway. So back on track. Always before Mother's day has been about honoring my mom, dealing with the hurt the day caused me before I had the boys, or shoving my head in the sand just being in shock that I WAS a mom. This year I enjoyed my kids. I really did. But there was more. I spent a lot of my free time reading blogs (a new obsession). They were mainly adoption related and many were the blogs of parents who had placed or adoptees. Reading these blogs, and a call to Ty's mom on Mother's Day, triggered a lot of thinking on my part.
I understand that placing a child for adoption is losing a child. It doesn't matter if that child was involuntarily removed by a government agency (put first here ONLY because it's the situation for me and my boys), placed voluntarily after deciding it was the best decision to make in a bad situation with no GOOD choice, or placed "voluntarily" due to coercion. It still has to hurt. I can't honestly say I know what these parents go through but I can get a small idea. I dealt with the pain of wanting children and knowing how hard it would be for me to do that from the time I was 14 years old. I've dealt with nearly 2.5 years in all of fear and pain at the thought of losing first Ty and Cory and now J and L. Is it the same? No, of course not. Is it worse than what a parent who placed feels? No, I don't imagine it is. Is it a solid base to allow me to have compassion for what that parent has suffered? Yes, it is.
Another thing I've thought about these last few days is how much the system needs to be changed. How? God, I wish I knew. The only thing I DO know is that there'll always be corruption in it as long as it's allowed to be a business. Until that changes parents (both through birth and adoption) and adoptees will continue to "pay" for it. Dearly. But from foster care to private adoptions it needs to be overhauled for sure. Still, some of what I've read scares me. I've read posts that sound like adoption shouldn't even be an option. Faults and all, the truth is that adoption works sometimes. Is a necessary choice sometimes.
I read in several different places how domestic infant adoptions have decreased since abortion was legalized and women began to have more options that allowed them to parent. About abortion...I'm not going to debate my beliefs on that here in this post. What I WILL say is that it's still losing a child and that many women who have chosen that route have suffered emotionally because of that choice as well. What I did NOT read in any of the same places is that while d.i. adoptions may have decreased, the incidences of child abuse and neglect and the number of children in foster care have increased. That is NOT an implied slur on young, poor, or unmarried parents or expectant parents. I do NOT believe that they are any more likely to be abusive, neglectful parents than parents who adopted. I point it out simply to show that adoption in some form continues to be necessary. I'm stressing this because it sounded to me like some wanted to do away with it completely. Major reform? Again and again....YES! To take it away totally? I don't think that's an option. There is corruption in every sector of adoption: greedy, unethical agencies; manipulative, dishonest aparents; and bparents who are out to scam. That doesn't mean that EVERY agency, aparent, or bparent is that way. Nor does it mean that adoption is inherently wrong and evil. I guess it's like this. Even if placing was the best choice in your situation, you still have the right to grieve. If you were one of the countless parents that didn't have a choice or were coerced into the placement you have the right to be pissed off and get some justice. In fact, I hope you do. But I don't understand how you can accept taking that choice away when you see what being denied a choice did to you? Adoption IS a valid choice if every person facing an unplanned pregnancy is presented with all their options in an unbiased way and allowed to make the choice that is best for them. Whatever reform in adoption may look like, that's where it needs to end up in my opinion.
The last thing I noticed while reading was the use of the word natural mother in some blogs. I wonder, like every adoptive parent who has come across the term, what that makes me? What made me angry was that in some places I saw the term it was used not to empower or respect mothers but to degrade amoms. As in: we are NOT mothers. On that I beg to differ. I take care of my kids when they're sick, help them with their schoolwork, comfort them when they're scared, meet their basic needs, and I could go on and on. What other term is there for that? Ask my sons who I am...they know. I have lots of friends who've adopted...ask any one of their kids who that person who has taken care of them is. Does that have to make you a less important part of your child's life? Not at all. Not less, just different. Ask my sons that too. They know they have 2 moms and that they're allowed to love us both. It didn't take away any of the love I had for Ty or Cory as we added to our family. If I can love more than one child, why can't they love both their moms? I'm guessing it's hurt and anger that makes some parents act that way but I didn't cause your hurt. So put your anger and hurt where it rightfully belongs in your situation and leave the rest of us out of it. I am my 4 boys' mom and I won't feel guilty about it.
Saturday, April 26, 2008
A Pre-emptive Apology/Explanation
I welcome anyone who finds this blog to read it and take from it what they will. I don't expect it to be controversial but I do want to say something about the adoption aspect of my writings. When I refer to my sons' adoptions, in particular their other families, please keep in mind at all times that they were adopted through fostercare and when I post about the adoptions I am posting from that slant and that slant only. I do NOT mean anything I say regarding the openness of the boys' adoptions or their families to be generalized to all adoptions and families, especially domestic infant adoptions. And for the record....how I deal with my sons' adoptions is no reflection on my opinions on the merit of open adoption or other families except my sons'.
Here is an overview of each of the boys' adoptions.
Cory's parents' rights had already been terminated before I met him, as I mentioned before. The judge ordered no contact at the time of tpr, though. I do know that. And I do know some of what he went through before coming into care. He will not be seeing his parent's until he is over the age of 18. At that time I've promised to help him look for them if he wants to and in return he's promised to go to counseling before to get as prepared as possible. He does have a 19 yr old brother that I have fought like heck to get in touch with. We've sent letters, cards, and pictures. Cory has called numerous times. D has been very inconsistant in communication, claiming he doesn't have a single picture to send Cory and having never written once. D has called a few times and speaks to Cory when he calls D. I KNOW he's young and it's a difficult and emotional situation but I hate that it hurts Cory. We'll continue to try, though.
Tyler does not see his dad. He has told everyone he is through with him and never wants to see him again. Even the basics that I now know about the man leave me no doubt that it's for the best. Should Ty change his mind as an adult, I will do what I can to support him in finding him and dealing with what comes of it. We still see A, Ty's mom. A lot. We meet for dinner, we meet at the park, and she sees him around all major holidays and his bday. She has a dd now, just over 2 yrs old, and it's important for them to know each other too I think. A made her mistakes but she isn't a bad person so I try hard to make it work. And you know what? It does, for the most part.
J and L won't be seeing C and M, their family, as children again if the case ends in tpr as it should and I adopt them (that's the unofficial plan as of now). Actually, I wouldn't be surprized if the judge ORDERS no contact in their case as well. When they turn 18...I don't know. Luckily I have some time to process that.
Well....there are my boys' adoptions in a nutshell. Please remember what I said when I began this post (after all, it's WHY I wrote this post) as you read.
Here is an overview of each of the boys' adoptions.
Cory's parents' rights had already been terminated before I met him, as I mentioned before. The judge ordered no contact at the time of tpr, though. I do know that. And I do know some of what he went through before coming into care. He will not be seeing his parent's until he is over the age of 18. At that time I've promised to help him look for them if he wants to and in return he's promised to go to counseling before to get as prepared as possible. He does have a 19 yr old brother that I have fought like heck to get in touch with. We've sent letters, cards, and pictures. Cory has called numerous times. D has been very inconsistant in communication, claiming he doesn't have a single picture to send Cory and having never written once. D has called a few times and speaks to Cory when he calls D. I KNOW he's young and it's a difficult and emotional situation but I hate that it hurts Cory. We'll continue to try, though.
Tyler does not see his dad. He has told everyone he is through with him and never wants to see him again. Even the basics that I now know about the man leave me no doubt that it's for the best. Should Ty change his mind as an adult, I will do what I can to support him in finding him and dealing with what comes of it. We still see A, Ty's mom. A lot. We meet for dinner, we meet at the park, and she sees him around all major holidays and his bday. She has a dd now, just over 2 yrs old, and it's important for them to know each other too I think. A made her mistakes but she isn't a bad person so I try hard to make it work. And you know what? It does, for the most part.
J and L won't be seeing C and M, their family, as children again if the case ends in tpr as it should and I adopt them (that's the unofficial plan as of now). Actually, I wouldn't be surprized if the judge ORDERS no contact in their case as well. When they turn 18...I don't know. Luckily I have some time to process that.
Well....there are my boys' adoptions in a nutshell. Please remember what I said when I began this post (after all, it's WHY I wrote this post) as you read.
Friday, April 25, 2008
Our Story Part 2
In late September 04 I got a call about Cory, a 9 yr old boy they needed respite care for. Would I take him for the weekend? I wasn't interested in respite AT ALL. So why did I say yes? I'm not sure. I think God did it lol. His parents had already lost their rights so after I met him and fell in love lol I called his caseworker and set up weekend visits with the idea of possibly adopting him. It didn't get that far. There was a shake up in the fc in our area and they called and asked if I would take him as a fc placement immediately. It was an uphill battle for him, though, actually. But it was made final, along with Ty, on Dec. 8th 2005. Woohoo! I had my boys.
In June of 06 we moved to a bigger home from our apt. and I began to "get the urge." Lol. So after much soul searching and praying, I reactivated our fc status. In Feb. of 07 J and L came to live with us. I knew from the beginning that their situation was serious and they shouldn't, and probably wouldn't, go home. It's been a hard year because I've dealt with the consequences of visits gone bad and past trauma. So worth it though, don't get me wrong. We're all just ready for it to be over!
I should mention that we have other members of our family though lol. Our 3 cats are: Abby (the perfect princess), Noah (aka No-no the Naughty), and Sparky (Fatboy).
In June of 06 we moved to a bigger home from our apt. and I began to "get the urge." Lol. So after much soul searching and praying, I reactivated our fc status. In Feb. of 07 J and L came to live with us. I knew from the beginning that their situation was serious and they shouldn't, and probably wouldn't, go home. It's been a hard year because I've dealt with the consequences of visits gone bad and past trauma. So worth it though, don't get me wrong. We're all just ready for it to be over!
I should mention that we have other members of our family though lol. Our 3 cats are: Abby (the perfect princess), Noah (aka No-no the Naughty), and Sparky (Fatboy).
Our Story
I've known since I was a young teen that having kids would mean adopting. I figured that I'd get married and we'd do domestic infant adoptions. Well, I never met "the one." I came close once. If I had to I guess I'd even say I'm still in love with him. The timing was wrong though and it just wasn't meant to be. I decided at 32 that if I waited for a man to come along I might never have kids so I started researching my options. I decided that adopting through foster care was the best option for me. I started the process and was approved (and on edge lol) in October 03.
In late January I got a call through the county for adoption. Of a newborn. Unheard of! Due in early Feb. Weeks of waiting lead to the call to go get some basics and get prepared! Then...NOTHING. Finally a call. It wasn't going to happen. I didn't have time to be depressed, though! On Feb 26th I got a call. Would I take a 6 year old for fostercare? He'd be going home but please would I be willing? I said yes and Tyler Scott came into my life. I loved him from the start. After 12 months of trying to reunify, the goal was changed to tpr and adoption. On Dec 08 05 it was made official!
See the next post for part 2!
In late January I got a call through the county for adoption. Of a newborn. Unheard of! Due in early Feb. Weeks of waiting lead to the call to go get some basics and get prepared! Then...NOTHING. Finally a call. It wasn't going to happen. I didn't have time to be depressed, though! On Feb 26th I got a call. Would I take a 6 year old for fostercare? He'd be going home but please would I be willing? I said yes and Tyler Scott came into my life. I loved him from the start. After 12 months of trying to reunify, the goal was changed to tpr and adoption. On Dec 08 05 it was made official!
See the next post for part 2!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
