Closed Adoption and found the birth mother

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[i]My sister had a closed adoption and the birth mother was adamant she didn't want to be contacted. My sister took the Ancestry DNA test and found close relatives like cousins and siblings. She's been messaging them and they are upset, have no knowledge of the birth and don't want her to contact them. An older woman told my sister she had no right to do this. She has no way to message the birth mother directly.

Any advice? I think since it was a closed adoption she should only message the birth mother and not the rest of the family. My parents think this woman has no right to privacy in 2018 and her entire family should know about her teenage birth and don't care about any consequences if her children or husband or parents find out. I see both sides. I feel for this woman who was a young teen when she had the baby and chose adoption over abortion under the condition that it was a closed adoption. And then I feel for my sister who wants a new family.

Just because it seems no one in the newer posts can read, please read the bolded, direct.y from the original post.

The birth mother did not want to be contacted. That’s what “adamant she didn’t want to be contacted” means.

Seems like English. Although, I suppose the educational system is failing.

Then, to make it MORE CLEAR, the family is saying they don’t want the adoptee to contact them.

I don’t even understand the question. Because you don’t “feel” like these people have a right to privacy, doesn’t mean intruding in their lives is the right answe.

I am one of the posters you are referring to. And, yes, I can read. It says that the biological mother “was” adamant but does not say anything about now, decades later. Also, I am wondering how the original poster knows that the mother was adamant about this. [b] Either way, I do not see any problem with a person reaching out to their biological parent if they can identify them, and seeing where it goes. No, the biological parent does not need to respond, and, as with all interactions, continuing to contact in the face of rejection Ken in some circumstances be harassment or worse. There is a world of difference between reaching out once, and harassment. Not the same thing at all. Nobody can point to anything that reflects the biological mothers wishes any time over the past several decades. And if the biological mother has any sense, she is well aware that she gave up a child and that the child will be able to locate her with current technology. It is not as though this would be a surprise.

This person didn’t reach out to the biological parent. They reached out to some cousins or other people they randomly found through a DNA test because they clicked yes on some box they had no idea they shouldn’t click yes to.

Why is it so hard for so many posters to see the distinction?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A closed adopted does not assume the birth mother wanted no contact. Stop repeating this ad nauseum. It was designed to protect the ADOPTIVE PARENTS only. Keep in mind also that the birth father had zero rights for many years. It is pretty easy, btw, to find the bio mother without DNA...and much harder for her to find the adoptive family.

OP here. The closed adoption was the birth mother's choice, not my parents. My parents didn't care, they just wanted the baby.

A closed adoption is still legal for as much as it can be. It means she was not going to have contact, but the legal document cannot mandate anonymity on any level other than keeping the birth certificate sealed.
Bottom line- she had every right to contact them. She has, however, no reason to continue to do so after hearing that they do not want it. She did the right thing, and now she will also do the right thing and leave them alone. As painful as it was for her, she knows what she needs to know, and it was her full right to know it- even the fact that they were assholes*-and will move on. Her children may revisit this later, and that will be their decision.
*knowing about who they were as people will be part of her life knowledge..it is Ok, and she will be OK.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A closed adopted does not assume the birth mother wanted no contact. Stop repeating this ad nauseum. It was designed to protect the ADOPTIVE PARENTS only. Keep in mind also that the birth father had zero rights for many years. It is pretty easy, btw, to find the bio mother without DNA...and much harder for her to find the adoptive family.

This brings up a good point. What if the birth mother chose closed as the best way to handle circumstances at that time, but since her situation changed and she now would be open to contact? Is that openness and opportunity lost because she chose a different option years ago?

Just asking.

Sure, in this case, the adoptee found that out. She didn't already have some statement in writing before that. Plus, 18 years+ is a long time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A closed adopted does not assume the birth mother wanted no contact. Stop repeating this ad nauseum. It was designed to protect the ADOPTIVE PARENTS only. Keep in mind also that the birth father had zero rights for many years. It is pretty easy, btw, to find the bio mother without DNA...and much harder for her to find the adoptive family.

OP here. The closed adoption was the birth mother's choice, not my parents. My parents didn't care, they just wanted the baby.

A closed adoption is still legal for as much as it can be. It means she was not going to have contact, but the legal document cannot mandate anonymity on any level other than keeping the birth certificate sealed.
Bottom line- she had every right to contact them. She has, however, no reason to continue to do so after hearing that they do not want it. She did the right thing, and now she will also do the right thing and leave them alone. As painful as it was for her, she knows what she needs to know, and it was her full right to know it- even the fact that they were assholes*-and will move on. Her children may revisit this later, and that will be their decision.
*knowing about who they were as people will be part of her life knowledge..it is Ok, and she will be OK.

This is such a projection, it’s almost laughable. They’re assholes for not wanting to greet a complete stranger to come into their lives, but she’s not an asshole for barging Into theirs, unwelcome? She chose to disregard the constraints or suggestion of a closed adoption, and unwillingness of contact, but somehow the family is to blame for not being warm and fuzzy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only people who's opinions should count are the birth family's and the adoptee. No one else. Not the adoptive family and certainly not the random general public who have no idea or experience about adoption and couldn't possibly fathom what it's like to have placed a child or be adopted. Everyone else is talking out of their ass.

Like the woman who chose to give up her child for adoption, closed the adoption, didn’t want to be contacted, but had her family contacted (instead of her), regardless?

Adoptee didn’t find her family using a PI they gave their genetic material to a private corporation who btw didn’t guarantee that they wouldn’t be contacting by ppl they wouldn’t want to hear from. Birth mother should be just as angry with her relatives.

nope
just because you found out your mother doesn't mean you have the right to contact her (much less insist on it) if she explicitly said she didn't want you to

Well when someone opts into being contacted on one of these platforms it does. That’s why you have the option to not do that. Have you ever used 23 and me or Ancestry? You select to allow people to contact you. Also as is obvious from the first post...OP’s sister didn’t contact her relatives through any other means besides the website.

yes i have used 23 and me, but that is completely irrelevant. technology doesn't change anything. you can in principle contact people who opt out but if you KNOW THAT YOU ARENT SUPPOSED TO then you shouldn't do it.

lets say i have a relative who i had a falling out with and he told me never to speak to him again and he registered on 23&me and there was a match made possible by him allowing generic strangers to contact him. i would not contact him! just because the site allows it and he said it was ok to (but not to me specifically - just in general) doesn't mean i should do it. specific agreements related to closed adoption vastly override some general purpose agreement on some website.

If you used it, you would see that you don't need to contact anyone at all to see a genetic relationship...it SAYS it there..even if the OP's sister never contacted anyone, they can still see it and figure it out pretty quickly. I was sent a message like this : "Who are you? I know all my siblings/cousins, and they aren't on here."


Also, if she contacted them, they could choose not answer. But, they will still know...her crime was having her DNA up there, that's all. Oh, and being born.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Totally going out on a limb here, but for the ones who think it’s okay that the family be contacted: how do you handle invitations that only include certain people? Like if your children weren’t invited to a wedding, would you still bring them because you feel they should be there? If your DH goes out for boys night, do you feel you should go along too?

Can you join another thread, crazy person?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A closed adopted does not assume the birth mother wanted no contact. Stop repeating this ad nauseum. It was designed to protect the ADOPTIVE PARENTS only. Keep in mind also that the birth father had zero rights for many years. It is pretty easy, btw, to find the bio mother without DNA...and much harder for her to find the adoptive family.

OP here. The closed adoption was the birth mother's choice, not my parents. My parents didn't care, they just wanted the baby.

A closed adoption is still legal for as much as it can be. It means she was not going to have contact, but the legal document cannot mandate anonymity on any level other than keeping the birth certificate sealed.
Bottom line- she had every right to contact them. She has, however, no reason to continue to do so after hearing that they do not want it. She did the right thing, and now she will also do the right thing and leave them alone. As painful as it was for her, she knows what she needs to know, and it was her full right to know it- even the fact that they were assholes*-and will move on. Her children may revisit this later, and that will be their decision.
*knowing about who they were as people will be part of her life knowledge..it is Ok, and she will be OK.

This is such a projection, it’s almost laughable. They’re assholes for not wanting to greet a complete stranger to come into their lives, but she’s not an asshole for barging Into theirs, unwelcome? She chose to disregard the constraints or suggestion of a closed adoption, and unwillingness of contact, but somehow the family is to blame for not being warm and fuzzy?

Yeah, it's pretty clear they were.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only people who's opinions should count are the birth family's and the adoptee. No one else. Not the adoptive family and certainly not the random general public who have no idea or experience about adoption and couldn't possibly fathom what it's like to have placed a child or be adopted. Everyone else is talking out of their ass.

Like the woman who chose to give up her child for adoption, closed the adoption, didn’t want to be contacted, but had her family contacted (instead of her), regardless?

Adoptee didn’t find her family using a PI they gave their genetic material to a private corporation who btw didn’t guarantee that they wouldn’t be contacting by ppl they wouldn’t want to hear from. Birth mother should be just as angry with her relatives.

nope
just because you found out your mother doesn't mean you have the right to contact her (much less insist on it) if she explicitly said she didn't want you to

Well when someone opts into being contacted on one of these platforms it does. That’s why you have the option to not do that. Have you ever used 23 and me or Ancestry? You select to allow people to contact you. Also as is obvious from the first post...OP’s sister didn’t contact her relatives through any other means besides the website.

yes i have used 23 and me, but that is completely irrelevant. technology doesn't change anything. you can in principle contact people who opt out but if you KNOW THAT YOU ARENT SUPPOSED TO then you shouldn't do it.

lets say i have a relative who i had a falling out with and he told me never to speak to him again and he registered on 23&me and there was a match made possible by him allowing generic strangers to contact him. i would not contact him! just because the site allows it and he said it was ok to (but not to me specifically - just in general) doesn't mean i should do it. specific agreements related to closed adoption vastly override some general purpose agreement on some website.

If you used it, you would see that you don't need to contact anyone at all to see a genetic relationship...it SAYS it there..even if the OP's sister never contacted anyone, they can still see it and figure it out pretty quickly. I was sent a message like this : "Who are you? I know all my siblings/cousins, and they aren't on here."


Also, if she contacted them, they could choose not answer. But, they will still know...her crime was having her DNA up there, that's all. Oh, and being born.

Something tells me (although I’m not sure)that sister went all long lost relative/waggly puppy on them, probably explaining how she was adopted, etc. etc. etc. (as evidenced by their response). Her crime was wading in where she already knew she was unlikely to be embraced.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Totally going out on a limb here, but for the ones who think it’s okay that the family be contacted: how do you handle invitations that only include certain people? Like if your children weren’t invited to a wedding, would you still bring them because you feel they should be there? If your DH goes out for boys night, do you feel you should go along too?

Can you join another thread, crazy person?

I love how on this board, people who disagree with your opinion must be crazy.

No wonder people love the term gaslighting around here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only people who's opinions should count are the birth family's and the adoptee. No one else. Not the adoptive family and certainly not the random general public who have no idea or experience about adoption and couldn't possibly fathom what it's like to have placed a child or be adopted. Everyone else is talking out of their ass.

Like the woman who chose to give up her child for adoption, closed the adoption, didn’t want to be contacted, but had her family contacted (instead of her), regardless?

Adoptee didn’t find her family using a PI they gave their genetic material to a private corporation who btw didn’t guarantee that they wouldn’t be contacting by ppl they wouldn’t want to hear from. Birth mother should be just as angry with her relatives.

nope
just because you found out your mother doesn't mean you have the right to contact her (much less insist on it) if she explicitly said she didn't want you to

Well when someone opts into being contacted on one of these platforms it does. That’s why you have the option to not do that. Have you ever used 23 and me or Ancestry? You select to allow people to contact you. Also as is obvious from the first post...OP’s sister didn’t contact her relatives through any other means besides the website.

According to your logic, if I have a restraining order against someone it is ok for him to contact me through any website where I opt in into being contacted by strangers. Yeah... things don't work that way.

No because violating a restraining order is a crime (or if it is a CPO a civil violation). A message you send someone knowing you are prohibited from contacting them is the violation. Messaging someone on a website they’ve joined short of a court order telling you not to do otherwise is not. By your “logic” if someone ugly messaged you on a dating website then they would have committed some sort of offense.

And just to cut off your next half baked argument that electing a closed adoption is akin to a restraining order, closed in closed adoption refers to information. You can’t actually bind an infant, because among other things they lack the legal capacity to enter into this type of agreement, from contacting their biological parents if they find them via other means. Whether they SHOULD do so is a different issue...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only people who's opinions should count are the birth family's and the adoptee. No one else. Not the adoptive family and certainly not the random general public who have no idea or experience about adoption and couldn't possibly fathom what it's like to have placed a child or be adopted. Everyone else is talking out of their ass.

Like the woman who chose to give up her child for adoption, closed the adoption, didn’t want to be contacted, but had her family contacted (instead of her), regardless?

Adoptee didn’t find her family using a PI they gave their genetic material to a private corporation who btw didn’t guarantee that they wouldn’t be contacting by ppl they wouldn’t want to hear from. Birth mother should be just as angry with her relatives.

nope
just because you found out your mother doesn't mean you have the right to contact her (much less insist on it) if she explicitly said she didn't want you to

Well when someone opts into being contacted on one of these platforms it does. That’s why you have the option to not do that. Have you ever used 23 and me or Ancestry? You select to allow people to contact you. Also as is obvious from the first post...OP’s sister didn’t contact her relatives through any other means besides the website.

This is being obtuse for the sake of being obtuse.

The adoptee KNEW it was a closed adoption, and that the mother was adamant she should not be contacted. In what world should someone then extrapolate that it’s okay to contact everyone else they can get their hands on and tell them their (and thus, also the birth mother’s) story? And the. Actually feels upset that no one wants to buy in?

NP. Because *other adults who have full agency are involved in this scenario.* If I had a half-sibling out there, I would want to know. And I would figure out a way to make contact and possibly form a connection without involving my mother or father. Yes, the birth mother gets to decide no contact. But the child can choose to pursue contacts with other blood relatives, and those blood relatives can choose to engage or not. Once it is clear that anyone in this scenario is not interested in contact, that right should be respected.

So if it says no trespassing on the fence, it’s okay if I break in the side door?

So if you decide you don’t want to be resuscitated can you decide that every adult that is tangentially related to you won’t be resuscitated either?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only people who's opinions should count are the birth family's and the adoptee. No one else. Not the adoptive family and certainly not the random general public who have no idea or experience about adoption and couldn't possibly fathom what it's like to have placed a child or be adopted. Everyone else is talking out of their ass.

Like the woman who chose to give up her child for adoption, closed the adoption, didn’t want to be contacted, but had her family contacted (instead of her), regardless?

Adoptee didn’t find her family using a PI they gave their genetic material to a private corporation who btw didn’t guarantee that they wouldn’t be contacting by ppl they wouldn’t want to hear from. Birth mother should be just as angry with her relatives.

nope
just because you found out your mother doesn't mean you have the right to contact her (much less insist on it) if she explicitly said she didn't want you to

Well when someone opts into being contacted on one of these platforms it does. That’s why you have the option to not do that. Have you ever used 23 and me or Ancestry? You select to allow people to contact you. Also as is obvious from the first post...OP’s sister didn’t contact her relatives through any other means besides the website.

This is being obtuse for the sake of being obtuse.

The adoptee KNEW it was a closed adoption, and that the mother was adamant she should not be contacted. In what world should someone then extrapolate that it’s okay to contact everyone else they can get their hands on and tell them their (and thus, also the birth mother’s) story? And the. Actually feels upset that no one wants to buy in?

NP. Because *other adults who have full agency are involved in this scenario.* If I had a half-sibling out there, I would want to know. And I would figure out a way to make contact and possibly form a connection without involving my mother or father. Yes, the birth mother gets to decide no contact. But the child can choose to pursue contacts with other blood relatives, and those blood relatives can choose to engage or not. Once it is clear that anyone in this scenario is not interested in contact, that right should be respected.

So if it says no trespassing on the fence, it’s okay if I break in the side door?

So if you decide you don’t want to be resuscitated can you decide that every adult that is tangentially related to you won’t be resuscitated either?

No, but to follow your bouncing ball, if I write an order that I don’t want to be resuscitated, the; I don’t want to be resuscuitated. I don’t expect the medical team to contact my cousins to see if I really meant it, or for them to doubt my decision because it’s been a while.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only people who's opinions should count are the birth family's and the adoptee. No one else. Not the adoptive family and certainly not the random general public who have no idea or experience about adoption and couldn't possibly fathom what it's like to have placed a child or be adopted. Everyone else is talking out of their ass.

Like the woman who chose to give up her child for adoption, closed the adoption, didn’t want to be contacted, but had her family contacted (instead of her), regardless?

Adoptee didn’t find her family using a PI they gave their genetic material to a private corporation who btw didn’t guarantee that they wouldn’t be contacting by ppl they wouldn’t want to hear from. Birth mother should be just as angry with her relatives.

nope
just because you found out your mother doesn't mean you have the right to contact her (much less insist on it) if she explicitly said she didn't want you to

Well when someone opts into being contacted on one of these platforms it does. That’s why you have the option to not do that. Have you ever used 23 and me or Ancestry? You select to allow people to contact you. Also as is obvious from the first post...OP’s sister didn’t contact her relatives through any other means besides the website.

This is being obtuse for the sake of being obtuse.

The adoptee KNEW it was a closed adoption, and that the mother was adamant she should not be contacted. In what world should someone then extrapolate that it’s okay to contact everyone else they can get their hands on and tell them their (and thus, also the birth mother’s) story? And the. Actually feels upset that no one wants to buy in?

NP. Because *other adults who have full agency are involved in this scenario.* If I had a half-sibling out there, I would want to know. And I would figure out a way to make contact and possibly form a connection without involving my mother or father. Yes, the birth mother gets to decide no contact. But the child can choose to pursue contacts with other blood relatives, and those blood relatives can choose to engage or not. Once it is clear that anyone in this scenario is not interested in contact, that right should be respected.

But the point is that having a child is a completely different situation. The child is a human being and very much an Intercal part of the decision that the mother unilaterally made. It is an unusual thing that one person can make the choice for another not to know his or her blood relations or to have any opportunity to see the people the child is related to. With that kind of extreme right, my view is that there is also a responsibility to behave humanely. These are often children who have no idea why their parents abandoned them. Why they weren’t worth the trouble, worth the sacrifice, worth even the inconvenience of being embarrassed later in life by being available to answer questions. To me, that is an incredibly selfish act for biological parent. It very well may be that placing your child for adoption is fully altruistic and benefits you were a child. But not offering to provide information or any contact when your own child approaches you to me is the upmost and selfish behavior. At core, I believe that we all owe each other common decency and, where we can provide it, information and enclosure. And when discussing a biological parent, in my view that responsibility is heightened extraordinarily. Giving up your child for adoption in my view takes away the responsibility for caring for and raising the child. It does not take away the responsibility of behaving empathetically and with an open heart and kindness to a life that you brought into the world.



So if it says no trespassing on the fence, it’s okay if I break in the side door?

So if you decide you don’t want to be resuscitated can you decide that every adult that is tangentially related to you won’t be resuscitated either?

No, but to follow your bouncing ball, if I write an order that I don’t want to be resuscitated, the; I don’t want to be resuscuitated. I don’t expect the medical team to contact my cousins to see if I really meant it, or for them to doubt my decision because it’s been a while.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A closed adopted does not assume the birth mother wanted no contact. Stop repeating this ad nauseum. It was designed to protect the ADOPTIVE PARENTS only. Keep in mind also that the birth father had zero rights for many years. It is pretty easy, btw, to find the bio mother without DNA...and much harder for her to find the adoptive family.

OP here. The closed adoption was the birth mother's choice, not my parents. My parents didn't care, they just wanted the baby.

A closed adoption is still legal for as much as it can be. It means she was not going to have contact, but the legal document cannot mandate anonymity on any level other than keeping the birth certificate sealed.
Bottom line- she had every right to contact them. She has, however, no reason to continue to do so after hearing that they do not want it. She did the right thing, and now she will also do the right thing and leave them alone. As painful as it was for her, she knows what she needs to know, and it was her full right to know it- even the fact that they were assholes*-and will move on. Her children may revisit this later, and that will be their decision.
*knowing about who they were as people will be part of her life knowledge..it is Ok, and she will be OK.

This is such a projection, it’s almost laughable. They’re assholes for not wanting to greet a complete stranger to come into their lives, but she’s not an asshole for barging Into theirs, unwelcome? She chose to disregard the constraints or suggestion of a closed adoption, and unwillingness of contact, but somehow the family is to blame for not being warm and fuzzy?

Yeah, it's pretty clear they were.

So was the sister.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only people who's opinions should count are the birth family's and the adoptee. No one else. Not the adoptive family and certainly not the random general public who have no idea or experience about adoption and couldn't possibly fathom what it's like to have placed a child or be adopted. Everyone else is talking out of their ass.

Like the woman who chose to give up her child for adoption, closed the adoption, didn’t want to be contacted, but had her family contacted (instead of her), regardless?

Adoptee didn’t find her family using a PI they gave their genetic material to a private corporation who btw didn’t guarantee that they wouldn’t be contacting by ppl they wouldn’t want to hear from. Birth mother should be just as angry with her relatives.

nope
just because you found out your mother doesn't mean you have the right to contact her (much less insist on it) if she explicitly said she didn't want you to

Well when someone opts into being contacted on one of these platforms it does. That’s why you have the option to not do that. Have you ever used 23 and me or Ancestry? You select to allow people to contact you. Also as is obvious from the first post...OP’s sister didn’t contact her relatives through any other means besides the website.

This is being obtuse for the sake of being obtuse.

The adoptee KNEW it was a closed adoption, and that the mother was adamant she should not be contacted. In what world should someone then extrapolate that it’s okay to contact everyone else they can get their hands on and tell them their (and thus, also the birth mother’s) story? And the. Actually feels upset that no one wants to buy in?

NP. Because *other adults who have full agency are involved in this scenario.* If I had a half-sibling out there, I would want to know. And I would figure out a way to make contact and possibly form a connection without involving my mother or father. Yes, the birth mother gets to decide no contact. But the child can choose to pursue contacts with other blood relatives, and those blood relatives can choose to engage or not. Once it is clear that anyone in this scenario is not interested in contact, that right should be respected.

But the point is that having a child is a completely different situation. The child is a human being and very much an Intercal part of the decision that the mother unilaterally made. It is an unusual thing that one person can make the choice for another not to know his or her blood relations or to have any opportunity to see the people the child is related to. With that kind of extreme right, my view is that there is also a responsibility to behave humanely. These are often children who have no idea why their parents abandoned them. Why they weren’t worth the trouble, worth the sacrifice, worth even the inconvenience of being embarrassed later in life by being available to answer questions. To me, that is an incredibly selfish act for biological parent. It very well may be that placing your child for adoption is fully altruistic and benefits you were a child. But not offering to provide information or any contact when your own child approaches you to me is the upmost and selfish behavior. At core, I believe that we all owe each other common decency and, where we can provide it, information and enclosure. And when discussing a biological parent, in my view that responsibility is heightened extraordinarily. Giving up your child for adoption in my view takes away the responsibility for caring for and raising the child. It does not take away the responsibility of behaving empathetically and with an open heart and kindness to a life that you brought into the world.



So if it says no trespassing on the fence, it’s okay if I break in the side door?

So if you decide you don’t want to be resuscitated can you decide that every adult that is tangentially related to you won’t be resuscitated either?

No, but to follow your bouncing ball, if I write an order that I don’t want to be resuscitated, the; I don’t want to be resuscuitated. I don’t expect the medical team to contact my cousins to see if I really meant it, or for them to doubt my decision because it’s been a while.

The bio mother cannot make decisions and ultimatums for the entire biological family. Again, she doesn't have the proprietary ownership of this person.