Closed Adoption and found the birth mother

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Your argument isn't even in the realm of the issue. You are not being gaslit...you are just on another topic...weddings, parties...whatever

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really hope all the right to life organizations realize what they’re doing to women down the line, when they encourage them to adopt because it gives them and their child a “better life”. You’re a prisoner either way. No one wants to pay for women to have access to contraception, but they want to insert themselves into their lives.m

Do you think all the adopted kids wish they'd never been born? Some, I'm sure, have gone on to have difficult lives. But many have gone on to have fulfilling lives. So abortion isn't necessarily the better route. We don't know what the situations are in all the cases of adoption. It may be logical to you and me to have an abortion, but I won't wade into other families' religious beliefs and their views on the sanctity of life.

Frankly, I don't think abortion/anti abortion has a place in this discussion over closed adoptions and finding the birth mother. It's an entirely different topic.

I’m saying that if they had known their lives would be impacted / “blown up” 20 years down the line, many women may not have chosen adoption. They choose what they felt was best for both their child, and themselves. Now, that choice is being taken away. And so many on this thread are saying that’s okay.

It’s not. This was a conscious choice, years ago. And their right to their lives has to mean something too.

When thinking of the reasons for adoption, a, narrative is that the biological mother made the best decision that she could on this under the circumstances at the time her baby was born, she did what she needed to do for her baby to have a better life than the mom could provide. They narrative is not generally that the mother was embarrassed about having been pregnant and having a child and decided to hide that embarrassment from her family until the end of time. For a biological mothers who were looking out for their child’s best interest, I would think they would likely be thrilled to find out what has become of their biological children. And if at that point their life circumstances had changed such that they could have a relationship with an adult child, rather than having to go through the stressful, hugely time consuming and emotionally draining raising of a child to adult hood, why wouldn’t they want to?

In short, if my mom loved me so much that she was willing to part with me so that I could have a better life, why wouldn’t she want to know how I turned out many decades later?

These children are not secret in their own lives. They have families that care for them. They are looking for more, where there may not be more. A choice to make an adoption closed is done so for a reason.

Because surely you’ve heard that loving something means letting it go. Your mother likely had felt that you were never “hers” to hold onto.
Because the adult has nothing to do with their lives anymore, as painful as that sounds.

Families aren’t built by genes. They’re built by love.

Unless you
Need a bone marrow transplant
Have a familial mutation that is recessive, so.....

[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.

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.

Clearly you don't follow the "bouncing ball." See the bolded.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really hope all the right to life organizations realize what they’re doing to women down the line, when they encourage them to adopt because it gives them and their child a “better life”. You’re a prisoner either way. No one wants to pay for women to have access to contraception, but they want to insert themselves into their lives.m

Do you think all the adopted kids wish they'd never been born? Some, I'm sure, have gone on to have difficult lives. But many have gone on to have fulfilling lives. So abortion isn't necessarily the better route. We don't know what the situations are in all the cases of adoption. It may be logical to you and me to have an abortion, but I won't wade into other families' religious beliefs and their views on the sanctity of life.

Frankly, I don't think abortion/anti abortion has a place in this discussion over closed adoptions and finding the birth mother. It's an entirely different topic.

I’m saying that if they had known their lives would be impacted / “blown up” 20 years down the line, many women may not have chosen adoption. They choose what they felt was best for both their child, and themselves. Now, that choice is being taken away. And so many on this thread are saying that’s okay.

It’s not. This was a conscious choice, years ago. And their right to their lives has to mean something too.

When thinking of the reasons for adoption, a, narrative is that the biological mother made the best decision that she could on this under the circumstances at the time her baby was born, she did what she needed to do for her baby to have a better life than the mom could provide. They narrative is not generally that the mother was embarrassed about having been pregnant and having a child and decided to hide that embarrassment from her family until the end of time. For a biological mothers who were looking out for their child’s best interest, I would think they would likely be thrilled to find out what has become of their biological children. And if at that point their life circumstances had changed such that they could have a relationship with an adult child, rather than having to go through the stressful, hugely time consuming and emotionally draining raising of a child to adult hood, why wouldn’t they want to?

In short, if my mom loved me so much that she was willing to part with me so that I could have a better life, why wouldn’t she want to know how I turned out many decades later?

These children are not secret in their own lives. They have families that care for them. They are looking for more, where there may not be more. A choice to make an adoption closed is done so for a reason.

Because surely you’ve heard that loving something means letting it go. Your mother likely had felt that you were never “hers” to hold onto.
Because the adult has nothing to do with their lives anymore, as painful as that sounds.

Families aren’t built by genes. They’re built by love.

Unless you
Need a bone marrow transplant
Have a familial mutation that is recessive, so.....

Statistics, a degree in math or in (specifically transplant) medicine may help you get over this argument.

Hint: if your family carries a gene, they are useless to you for transplants. Is it a nice to know? Sure.

PP, I’m going to agree to that you should be party to your medical history. You are owed your records. I dont agree that you get to be a part of everyone’s life that you feel obligated to be part of. But that’s their choice, and not yours.

Here’s the thing. We all get dealt the hand we get dealt. Don’t assume someone who grew up in their bio home had a better life.

You grow, you move on. You get therapy if you have to. But no one is “owed” anything, even from their parents. So many children are owed basic rights like love, safety, clean water, education, food, clean clothes. Do you know how many don’t get any of those? Even in countries where this doesn’t even seem like basics?

Not everyone is going to be welcoming to you, and that’s not a basic human right. That’s life. Do you know how many special needs parents need to hide their children’s diagnosis, or monitor their contact in society? Imagine feeling like you need to hide something, with your child in front of you.

Yes, adoption is unique, but not so unique that you get your own set of rules. Have you been safe, clean, Fed, educated? Your life may be better than it would have been growing up in your bio family. I know you don’t want to hear that, because you have a whole narrative as to why you are “owed” answers. I get it, in a perfect world, you would have them. But someone chose your life over a hundred other things. It’s not perfect, but life rarely is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do people keep saying that it is the discovery of extended family of an unknown birth an adoption that will blow up a woman’s life? First, how fragile are you our relationships such that they cannot withstand something like this? Even decades later? Also, if there is a concern, isn’t it the fact that the mother kept a secret and likely lied? And that the child contacting her is just disclosing true facts? And in the case being discussed, the birth mother has not even been involved in the correspondence. Remember, she did not tell anyone, supposedly, about her child’s existence. If she didn’t trust anyone in her family, why would we think that she trusts them now, or that they communicate with her well, or are looking out for her best interest. Why not let the mom speak for herself. I certainly don’t think anybody owes anybody a relationship, but this woman made a decision on behalf of her child and is now surprised that that child wants to know the facts of what happened. That the birth mother, and now adult woman out on her own, not a fragile team, maybe uncomfortable doesn’t change anything in my view. Sometimes you’re just called to explain the facts, and when you give birth to a child, that’s one of those times.

And this could just as easily be spun to adopted child. You’ve had a family who has raised, loved, sacrificed and stood by you. What gives you the right to disminish them in order to find someone who does not want to meet you, did not want any of those things, but gave you your blood type? Are you so “fragile” (your own words) that you do not see that every one has the right to living their own life as they see fit? They gave you life, and the gift of a family. Why do you need to push them for more?

And to add: I get it. Being adopted adds a unique narrative. But it does not give you the right to change someone’s life. Many people have imperfect childhoods and somehow cope without ripping other people’s lives apart. A closed adoption is that: closed. The mom did speak for herself. Sure, someone didn’t “want”you... but at least you have the flip side, unlike a lot of children raised by their bio parents, in that somoen DID want you.

because the adoptee is the child, not the parent. They had no say in the matter at all and their lives are often ripped apart by the sense of longing and loss that comes with being an adoptee. The birth parent is still the grownup in the situation and has had 100% of the control. After decades have gone by, that child now deserves some information. And FYI -- NO ADOPTEE would ever suggest finding their birth parent diminishes anything about their adoptive parents.

I absolutely hate when people use this argument. The adoptee didn't have a choice? Okay, here were the adoptee's choices: Live or Die. that's it. I guarantee you that if you ask any adoptee whether they would have preferred their birth mother killed them in utero, or place them for adoption, they'd choose living. So, this really isn't a good argument for anything going forward.

[Anonymous]

I've been reading stuff online that answers the question of "when the birth mother doesn't want to be found" and struggling to put into words what bothers me about it. Mostly it's the same stuff around "it's a human being, you need to face your demons, you cannot own the part of someone's history, get into therapy and do what you need to welcome the child into your life". Now I know what bothers me about it. It's the same disregard for the wishes and preferences of the birth mother that might have been shown at birth by unscrupulous adoption agencies. It doesn't matter what you want, what matters is what we want! We'll tell you how to feel about it! We know what's best for you! Who cares about the upheaval it will bring into your life! Just deal with it! The mother is de-humanized twice. First, when she isn't allowed to grieve and acknowledge the loss of her child. And then when she's forced to relieve these feelings again without the right to avoid them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do people keep saying that it is the discovery of extended family of an unknown birth an adoption that will blow up a woman’s life? First, how fragile are you our relationships such that they cannot withstand something like this? Even decades later? Also, if there is a concern, isn’t it the fact that the mother kept a secret and likely lied? And that the child contacting her is just disclosing true facts? And in the case being discussed, the birth mother has not even been involved in the correspondence. Remember, she did not tell anyone, supposedly, about her child’s existence. If she didn’t trust anyone in her family, why would we think that she trusts them now, or that they communicate with her well, or are looking out for her best interest. Why not let the mom speak for herself. I certainly don’t think anybody owes anybody a relationship, but this woman made a decision on behalf of her child and is now surprised that that child wants to know the facts of what happened. That the birth mother, and now adult woman out on her own, not a fragile team, maybe uncomfortable doesn’t change anything in my view. Sometimes you’re just called to explain the facts, and when you give birth to a child, that’s one of those times.

And this could just as easily be spun to adopted child. You’ve had a family who has raised, loved, sacrificed and stood by you. What gives you the right to disminish them in order to find someone who does not want to meet you, did not want any of those things, but gave you your blood type? Are you so “fragile” (your own words) that you do not see that every one has the right to living their own life as they see fit? They gave you life, and the gift of a family. Why do you need to push them for more?

And to add: I get it. Being adopted adds a unique narrative. But it does not give you the right to change someone’s life. Many people have imperfect childhoods and somehow cope without ripping other people’s lives apart. A closed adoption is that: closed. The mom did speak for herself. Sure, someone didn’t “want”you... but at least you have the flip side, unlike a lot of children raised by their bio parents, in that somoen DID want you.

because the adoptee is the child, not the parent. They had no say in the matter at all and their lives are often ripped apart by the sense of longing and loss that comes with being an adoptee. The birth parent is still the grownup in the situation and has had 100% of the control. After decades have gone by, that child now deserves some information. And FYI -- NO ADOPTEE would ever suggest finding their birth parent diminishes anything about their adoptive parents.

I absolutely hate when people use this argument. The adoptee didn't have a choice? Okay, here were the adoptee's choices: Live or Die. that's it. I guarantee you that if you ask any adoptee whether they would have preferred their birth mother killed them in utero, or place them for adoption, they'd choose living. So, this really isn't a good argument for anything going forward.

live or die? Of course someone who is currently alive wishes to remain alive in nearly all cases. What makes more sense is to ask if they would have been better off with their birth parents. Certain adoption agencies are big business and do full court press to get infants. I support adoption only in limited cases. Other countries allow the birth mother to change her mind within a reasonable time frame instead of the baby being whisked away at birth with no recourse.

[Anonymous]

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 is ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE. Before an adoption takes place, an option for a closed adoption is solely made by the birth mother. She is not opting for a closed adoption to protect the adoptive parents - she is choosing that option to protect herself.
Please stop spewing false information. You are referencing the early days of adoption when there were mandatory closed adoptions. that stopped decades ago. And when a birth mother chooses a closed adoption, it is SOLELY her decision and she makes it for her benefit only.

[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.

I'm sorry and I do respect what your sister is going through, but she did not do the right thing. the right thing would have been to contact her birthmother only (or at least first) and see if her BM wanted any contact. By contacting her BM's family and announcing who she was, was completely disrespectful to her BM. At a minimum, she could have contact the BM's family and just said, I believe I'm a distant relative of your mother's (or aunts or whatever that relationship was) and ask to be connected to the BM. It would have saved a lot of pain and misery for her own BM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Other countries allow the birth mother to change her mind within a reasonable time frame instead of the baby being whisked away at birth with no recourse.

Every state allows a period for the parent to change his/her mind. You may not think it's a reasonable length of time, but there's no 'whisked away at birth with no recourse'.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

No, but she does have proprietary ownership of her experience and what happened to her 20 years ago. This argument throughout this thread is akin to simple gossiping. Seriously. If you know something about someone, it doesn't give you the right to share that information with that person's nieces, nephews, aunts, whatever. Of course you have a right to share your own information, but it is just common decency to not spread the story of your BM with distant relatives (or any relatives for that matter).

So, adoptee could have contact her bio family and just said I'm related to you without sharing any more - but to share the BM's story is simply spreading gossip.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

In other words, you would take away from the birth mother any agency in deciding how to treat this. Surely you understand that disclosing a child given up for adoption (if this was previously unknown) to her family members would cause a major upheaval in her relationships with them? Or do you think she ought to be able to manage this and just move on? What if she doesn't want to? The adoption advocate positions that I read is "get therapy and get on with the program, face your demons". Again, the mother is made powerless twice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Other countries allow the birth mother to change her mind within a reasonable time frame instead of the baby being whisked away at birth with no recourse.

Every state allows a period for the parent to change his/her mind. You may not think it's a reasonable length of time, but there's no 'whisked away at birth with no recourse'.

+1

To the first poster. Please don't comment on what you don't know. What you're referring to was what happened decades ago, but is no longer the case. Birth mothers have time after the birth to change their minds - and many do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Other countries allow the birth mother to change her mind within a reasonable time frame instead of the baby being whisked away at birth with no recourse.

Every state allows a period for the parent to change his/her mind. You may not think it's a reasonable length of time, but there's no 'whisked away at birth with no recourse'.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Other countries allow the birth mother to change her mind within a reasonable time frame instead of the baby being whisked away at birth with no recourse.

Every state allows a period for the parent to change his/her mind. You may not think it's a reasonable length of time, but there's no 'whisked away at birth with no recourse'.

+1

To the first poster. Please don't comment on what you don't know. What you're referring to was what happened decades ago, but is no longer the case. Birth mothers have time after the birth to change their minds - and many do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

In other words, you would take away from the birth mother any agency in deciding how to treat this. Surely you understand that disclosing a child given up for adoption (if this was previously unknown) to her family members would cause a major upheaval in her relationships with them? Or do you think she ought to be able to manage this and just move on? What if she doesn't want to? The adoption advocate positions that I read is "get therapy and get on with the program, face your demons". Again, the mother is made powerless twice.


You have such an awful view of adoption and it sickens me. to automatically think that an adoption was the result of a person that thought their baby wasn't worth the trouble, sacrifice or inconvenience is ridiculously closed minded. You clearly haven't gone through the process and don't understand how difficult the decision is.

And by the way - that descriptive much more accurately describes someone choosing to abort their baby rather than someone choosing to place their baby for adoption.

You are awful and I hope you don't know any adoptees (or bio moms).