Child Joining Family through Adoption is NOT an Adopted Child

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an adoptee, I understand why it’s so annoying to always have that adjective mentioned. And I agree with you that there’s something very “othering” in the way some people speak about adoptees, particularly in the way they almost pathologically mention the adoption when mentioning the child. It gives the impression that the child doesn’t fully belong in their adoptive family, which is terribly cruel to the child.

But, it’s also true that we adoptees have two families: our first families and our adoptive families. And we belong - albeit in different ways - to both. So, yes, your adopted child is your child and not just your adopted child. They are also a child of their first family. It took me decades of therapy to find a way to have an integrated identity because my adoptive parents insisted I was “only” theirs, which your comments seem to suggest as well. Just watch for that with your adopted child. It can be very damaging too.

Thank you thank you thank you thank you for articulating this so perfectly. There are some adoptive parents who want to erase the fact that their children are adopted, pretend there is no difference, and erase the existence of an adopted child’s first family.

Children who join your family through adoption are already members of another family for their whole lives. If you do this right, you embrace that and allow your child to fully be part of both families, as part of their identity. You are the legal parent, and your child also has other parents. Whether or not you use the adjective “adopted”, do not erase your child’s full identity.

Who are you to define what adoption looks like for others? Believe it or not its 2022 and some families get along and have regular contact. And, those families all consider each other family. Its called open adoption.

And, no, my child has one set of parents.

But you have included his grandparents in your family? I am confused. What role do the birth parents have in your family?

We speaks to multiple members of the birth family many times per month. What is there to be confused about! They are family. We speak to them the same as other family members.

Why do you care? You are not an adoption savior. Start by treating your sibling better and like a sibling and not an outsider.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of my kids joined my family through adoption and let me tell you that I do not like when others refer to my kid as an adopted child. My kid is my child. Period. I would love if some of those people who label my kid as an adopted child, also labeled kids who the product of a surrogate, oh look at that surrogate child, or the kid who may have been fertilized by the sperm of someone other than their father, oh look at that bastard, or the kid whose mother used another women's egg. My kid does not keep how they came into the family a secret, but that does not mean that people should define who they are by how they joined the family. My kid is my child.

Unless it is a child of color then how does anyone know he/she is adopted unless you tell them?

Your child can be the same skin color and look nothing like you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OP of this thread is a really crazy and gross person. She claims no one can define adoption for others but then goes on to insult people who use terms like “adopted child” because actually she wants to define adoption for everyone else.

Exactly. And she’s completely lacking self awareness.

You lack self awareness and op is correct. It’s not op defining adoption,it’s others who have a sibling or no connection.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an adoptee, I understand why it’s so annoying to always have that adjective mentioned. And I agree with you that there’s something very “othering” in the way some people speak about adoptees, particularly in the way they almost pathologically mention the adoption when mentioning the child. It gives the impression that the child doesn’t fully belong in their adoptive family, which is terribly cruel to the child.

But, it’s also true that we adoptees have two families: our first families and our adoptive families. And we belong - albeit in different ways - to both. So, yes, your adopted child is your child and not just your adopted child. They are also a child of their first family. It took me decades of therapy to find a way to have an integrated identity because my adoptive parents insisted I was “only” theirs, which your comments seem to suggest as well. Just watch for that with your adopted child. It can be very damaging too.

I don't see it like you do. My child doesn't have a first family and second family. My child has one family who joined together to give the child the best possible life. We all consider ourselves family and just like families join for marriage, they join for adoption. Grandparents are grandparents, aunts/uncles are aunts/uncles, no different in our home.

You don't know how each family who adopts treats the situation but for us, there is no first family. We took our child home from the hospital and we are the only family this child has had.

You are SICK. Your child was not born in a damn cabbage patch. Your child has a mother in addition to you. You cannot erase her. She exists, as does your child’s first family. By diminishing your child’s first family, you diminish your child’s true identity. And entirely for your own selfish ego, being insecure about your role as the mother.

NP, but I am adopted. The woman who gave birth to me is my biological mother, and nothing more to me. The only family I have are the people who raised me. Not all adoptees have the same experience or feelings. Maybe hold onto your vitriol, since you can't speak for everyone and every family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an adoptee, I understand why it’s so annoying to always have that adjective mentioned. And I agree with you that there’s something very “othering” in the way some people speak about adoptees, particularly in the way they almost pathologically mention the adoption when mentioning the child. It gives the impression that the child doesn’t fully belong in their adoptive family, which is terribly cruel to the child.

But, it’s also true that we adoptees have two families: our first families and our adoptive families. And we belong - albeit in different ways - to both. So, yes, your adopted child is your child and not just your adopted child. They are also a child of their first family. It took me decades of therapy to find a way to have an integrated identity because my adoptive parents insisted I was “only” theirs, which your comments seem to suggest as well. Just watch for that with your adopted child. It can be very damaging too.

Thank you thank you thank you thank you for articulating this so perfectly. There are some adoptive parents who want to erase the fact that their children are adopted, pretend there is no difference, and erase the existence of an adopted child’s first family.

Children who join your family through adoption are already members of another family for their whole lives. If you do this right, you embrace that and allow your child to fully be part of both families, as part of their identity. You are the legal parent, and your child also has other parents. Whether or not you use the adjective “adopted”, do not erase your child’s full identity.

Who are you to define what adoption looks like for others? Believe it or not its 2022 and some families get along and have regular contact. And, those families all consider each other family. Its called open adoption.

And, no, my child has one set of parents.

But you have included his grandparents in your family? I am confused. What role do the birth parents have in your family?

This is where open adoption becomes challenging. In our situation the couple have a biological child and then adopted another child via an open adoption. The adopted child's birth family (mother, father, grandparents, siblings) are fully integrated into the family's life and have almost daily contact, visit weekly, and attend all holiday celebrations. Here's the challenge: they do not consider the couple's biological child their child/grandchild/niece and while not dismissive, it is obvious they are more connected to their birth child. As time goes on the differences are being noted by both children and ultimately no one knows how this will affect them psychologically in the long term.

This is not your situation, it is their situation and they are under no obligation to pretend for both kids. You don’t get it and you don’t get to define adoption for them. You are some random family member and sound off. Back off. When you call the child the adopted child, you clearly have not accepted them and are what op is talking about. You don’t consider this child part of the family. Thank goodness they have the other family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The OP of this thread is a really crazy and gross person. She claims no one can define adoption for others but then goes on to insult people who use terms like “adopted child” because actually she wants to define adoption for everyone else.

Exactly. And she’s completely lacking self awareness.

You lack self awareness and op is correct. It’s not op defining adoption,it’s others who have a sibling or no connection.

Don’t talk about yourself in the third person, OP.

[Anonymous]

Well, this thread went off the rails

I'm an adult adoptee in reunion with my birth family. I am indeed an adopted child; I did not join my family through birth.

I agree that too often, an adoptee is described as an adopted child when that fact isn't relevant. I don't like that and never have; don't get me started on the word "natural" either! But at times, I also think there are occasional situations when it's entirely appropriate (and necessary) to use the descriptor "adopted" without malice or exclusion.

I am also an adoptive parent (and I have a child I birthed) and it seems to me that OP's situation is an outlier in terms of the blending and involvement of both adoptive and birth families. My own adoption story and my child's adoption story are nothing alike and neither is like OP's at all either. I think each adoption story is unique and each adoptee's feelings are different; too different to be generalized.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an adoptee, I understand why it’s so annoying to always have that adjective mentioned. And I agree with you that there’s something very “othering” in the way some people speak about adoptees, particularly in the way they almost pathologically mention the adoption when mentioning the child. It gives the impression that the child doesn’t fully belong in their adoptive family, which is terribly cruel to the child.

But, it’s also true that we adoptees have two families: our first families and our adoptive families. And we belong - albeit in different ways - to both. So, yes, your adopted child is your child and not just your adopted child. They are also a child of their first family. It took me decades of therapy to find a way to have an integrated identity because my adoptive parents insisted I was “only” theirs, which your comments seem to suggest as well. Just watch for that with your adopted child. It can be very damaging too.

Thank you thank you thank you thank you for articulating this so perfectly. There are some adoptive parents who want to erase the fact that their children are adopted, pretend there is no difference, and erase the existence of an adopted child’s first family.

Children who join your family through adoption are already members of another family for their whole lives. If you do this right, you embrace that and allow your child to fully be part of both families, as part of their identity. You are the legal parent, and your child also has other parents. Whether or not you use the adjective “adopted”, do not erase your child’s full identity.

Who are you to define what adoption looks like for others? Believe it or not its 2022 and some families get along and have regular contact. And, those families all consider each other family. Its called open adoption.

And, no, my child has one set of parents.

But you have included his grandparents in your family? I am confused. What role do the birth parents have in your family?

This is where open adoption becomes challenging. In our situation the couple have a biological child and then adopted another child via an open adoption. The adopted child's birth family (mother, father, grandparents, siblings) are fully integrated into the family's life and have almost daily contact, visit weekly, and attend all holiday celebrations. Here's the challenge: they do not consider the couple's biological child their child/grandchild/niece and while not dismissive, it is obvious they are more connected to their birth child. As time goes on the differences are being noted by both children and ultimately no one knows how this will affect them psychologically in the long term.

This is not your situation, it is their situation and they are under no obligation to pretend for both kids. You don’t get it and you don’t get to define adoption for them. You are some random family member and sound off. Back off. When you call the child the adopted child, you clearly have not accepted them and are what op is talking about. You don’t consider this child part of the family. Thank goodness they have the other family.

You are so full of anger but also not making a ton of sense/ not actually reading posts very thoroughly?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an adoptee, I understand why it’s so annoying to always have that adjective mentioned. And I agree with you that there’s something very “othering” in the way some people speak about adoptees, particularly in the way they almost pathologically mention the adoption when mentioning the child. It gives the impression that the child doesn’t fully belong in their adoptive family, which is terribly cruel to the child.

But, it’s also true that we adoptees have two families: our first families and our adoptive families. And we belong - albeit in different ways - to both. So, yes, your adopted child is your child and not just your adopted child. They are also a child of their first family. It took me decades of therapy to find a way to have an integrated identity because my adoptive parents insisted I was “only” theirs, which your comments seem to suggest as well. Just watch for that with your adopted child. It can be very damaging too.

Thank you thank you thank you thank you for articulating this so perfectly. There are some adoptive parents who want to erase the fact that their children are adopted, pretend there is no difference, and erase the existence of an adopted child’s first family.

Children who join your family through adoption are already members of another family for their whole lives. If you do this right, you embrace that and allow your child to fully be part of both families, as part of their identity. You are the legal parent, and your child also has other parents. Whether or not you use the adjective “adopted”, do not erase your child’s full identity.

Who are you to define what adoption looks like for others? Believe it or not its 2022 and some families get along and have regular contact. And, those families all consider each other family. Its called open adoption.

And, no, my child has one set of parents.

But you have included his grandparents in your family? I am confused. What role do the birth parents have in your family?

This is where open adoption becomes challenging. In our situation the couple have a biological child and then adopted another child via an open adoption. The adopted child's birth family (mother, father, grandparents, siblings) are fully integrated into the family's life and have almost daily contact, visit weekly, and attend all holiday celebrations. Here's the challenge: they do not consider the couple's biological child their child/grandchild/niece and while not dismissive, it is obvious they are more connected to their birth child. As time goes on the differences are being noted by both children and ultimately no one knows how this will affect them psychologically in the long term.

This is not your situation, it is their situation and they are under no obligation to pretend for both kids. You don’t get it and you don’t get to define adoption for them. You are some random family member and sound off. Back off. When you call the child the adopted child, you clearly have not accepted them and are what op is talking about. You don’t consider this child part of the family. Thank goodness they have the other family.

You are so full of anger but also not making a ton of sense/ not actually reading posts very thoroughly?

A relative is constantly posting about their relative's adoption situation and is resentful that the birth family is involved with one child. Their posts are really inappropriate. That poster has not accepted the child into their family and is not happy about the adoption situation. Its not their decision or responsibility to manage or care. Its great the parents are doing what is best for that child.

I have zero anger. We have a lovely open adoption where we are all family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an adoptee, I understand why it’s so annoying to always have that adjective mentioned. And I agree with you that there’s something very “othering” in the way some people speak about adoptees, particularly in the way they almost pathologically mention the adoption when mentioning the child. It gives the impression that the child doesn’t fully belong in their adoptive family, which is terribly cruel to the child.

But, it’s also true that we adoptees have two families: our first families and our adoptive families. And we belong - albeit in different ways - to both. So, yes, your adopted child is your child and not just your adopted child. They are also a child of their first family. It took me decades of therapy to find a way to have an integrated identity because my adoptive parents insisted I was “only” theirs, which your comments seem to suggest as well. Just watch for that with your adopted child. It can be very damaging too.

Thank you thank you thank you thank you for articulating this so perfectly. There are some adoptive parents who want to erase the fact that their children are adopted, pretend there is no difference, and erase the existence of an adopted child’s first family.

Children who join your family through adoption are already members of another family for their whole lives. If you do this right, you embrace that and allow your child to fully be part of both families, as part of their identity. You are the legal parent, and your child also has other parents. Whether or not you use the adjective “adopted”, do not erase your child’s full identity.

Who are you to define what adoption looks like for others? Believe it or not its 2022 and some families get along and have regular contact. And, those families all consider each other family. Its called open adoption.

And, no, my child has one set of parents.

But you have included his grandparents in your family? I am confused. What role do the birth parents have in your family?

This is where open adoption becomes challenging. In our situation the couple have a biological child and then adopted another child via an open adoption. The adopted child's birth family (mother, father, grandparents, siblings) are fully integrated into the family's life and have almost daily contact, visit weekly, and attend all holiday celebrations. Here's the challenge: they do not consider the couple's biological child their child/grandchild/niece and while not dismissive, it is obvious they are more connected to their birth child. As time goes on the differences are being noted by both children and ultimately no one knows how this will affect them psychologically in the long term.

This is not your situation, it is their situation and they are under no obligation to pretend for both kids. You don’t get it and you don’t get to define adoption for them. You are some random family member and sound off. Back off. When you call the child the adopted child, you clearly have not accepted them and are what op is talking about. You don’t consider this child part of the family. Thank goodness they have the other family.

You are so full of anger but also not making a ton of sense/ not actually reading posts very thoroughly?

A relative is constantly posting about their relative's adoption situation and is resentful that the birth family is involved with one child. Their posts are really inappropriate. That poster has not accepted the child into their family and is not happy about the adoption situation. Its not their decision or responsibility to manage or care. Its great the parents are doing what is best for that child.

I have zero anger. We have a lovely open adoption where we are all family.

Ok. I just saw the comments like "you don't get it" "back off" "thank goodness the child has the other family" and it seemed really angry at this other poster. You seem to agree that adoption situations are nuanced but don't give this poster any leeway to feel nuanced about her own family's adoption story. And to be frank, seeing that situation- where the birth family is heavily involved (great, if that is what all parties want then great!) but basically ignores the child's siblings, it sounds like the birth family "othering" the siblings which can have lasting impacts on sibling dynamics and further cement in everyone's mind that this one child, who came to the family via adoption, is "other" and "different" and has this "other family" that the siblings do not have. Honestly, I'd be uncomfortable with this as well if it were happening in my family, but, since it's not, I get that it's not my business to have an opinion and that's fine. But to offer a third party viewpoint- I see the downsides to this just like that poster does.

[Anonymous]

This thread is the adoption version of “I don’t see color!”

Adoption is wonderful. It’s also its own ball of wax. OP seems deluded. My own family’s adoption story is complicated (and happy and beautiful). I would not say we are all one family. Birth mom is likely borderline personality disorder and difficult. It’s also a transracial adoption. So yes, not all one big happy family like OP apparently has.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an adoptee, I understand why it’s so annoying to always have that adjective mentioned. And I agree with you that there’s something very “othering” in the way some people speak about adoptees, particularly in the way they almost pathologically mention the adoption when mentioning the child. It gives the impression that the child doesn’t fully belong in their adoptive family, which is terribly cruel to the child.

But, it’s also true that we adoptees have two families: our first families and our adoptive families. And we belong - albeit in different ways - to both. So, yes, your adopted child is your child and not just your adopted child. They are also a child of their first family. It took me decades of therapy to find a way to have an integrated identity because my adoptive parents insisted I was “only” theirs, which your comments seem to suggest as well. Just watch for that with your adopted child. It can be very damaging too.

Thank you thank you thank you thank you for articulating this so perfectly. There are some adoptive parents who want to erase the fact that their children are adopted, pretend there is no difference, and erase the existence of an adopted child’s first family.

Children who join your family through adoption are already members of another family for their whole lives. If you do this right, you embrace that and allow your child to fully be part of both families, as part of their identity. You are the legal parent, and your child also has other parents. Whether or not you use the adjective “adopted”, do not erase your child’s full identity.

Who are you to define what adoption looks like for others? Believe it or not its 2022 and some families get along and have regular contact. And, those families all consider each other family. Its called open adoption.

And, no, my child has one set of parents.

But you have included his grandparents in your family? I am confused. What role do the birth parents have in your family?

This is where open adoption becomes challenging. In our situation the couple have a biological child and then adopted another child via an open adoption. The adopted child's birth family (mother, father, grandparents, siblings) are fully integrated into the family's life and have almost daily contact, visit weekly, and attend all holiday celebrations. Here's the challenge: they do not consider the couple's biological child their child/grandchild/niece and while not dismissive, it is obvious they are more connected to their birth child. As time goes on the differences are being noted by both children and ultimately no one knows how this will affect them psychologically in the long term.

This is not your situation, it is their situation and they are under no obligation to pretend for both kids. You don’t get it and you don’t get to define adoption for them. You are some random family member and sound off. Back off. When you call the child the adopted child, you clearly have not accepted them and are what op is talking about. You don’t consider this child part of the family. Thank goodness they have the other family.

Then why was the adoption even necessary?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an adoptee, I understand why it’s so annoying to always have that adjective mentioned. And I agree with you that there’s something very “othering” in the way some people speak about adoptees, particularly in the way they almost pathologically mention the adoption when mentioning the child. It gives the impression that the child doesn’t fully belong in their adoptive family, which is terribly cruel to the child.

But, it’s also true that we adoptees have two families: our first families and our adoptive families. And we belong - albeit in different ways - to both. So, yes, your adopted child is your child and not just your adopted child. They are also a child of their first family. It took me decades of therapy to find a way to have an integrated identity because my adoptive parents insisted I was “only” theirs, which your comments seem to suggest as well. Just watch for that with your adopted child. It can be very damaging too.

Thank you thank you thank you thank you for articulating this so perfectly. There are some adoptive parents who want to erase the fact that their children are adopted, pretend there is no difference, and erase the existence of an adopted child’s first family.

Children who join your family through adoption are already members of another family for their whole lives. If you do this right, you embrace that and allow your child to fully be part of both families, as part of their identity. You are the legal parent, and your child also has other parents. Whether or not you use the adjective “adopted”, do not erase your child’s full identity.

Who are you to define what adoption looks like for others? Believe it or not its 2022 and some families get along and have regular contact. And, those families all consider each other family. Its called open adoption.

And, no, my child has one set of parents.

But you have included his grandparents in your family? I am confused. What role do the birth parents have in your family?

This is where open adoption becomes challenging. In our situation the couple have a biological child and then adopted another child via an open adoption. The adopted child's birth family (mother, father, grandparents, siblings) are fully integrated into the family's life and have almost daily contact, visit weekly, and attend all holiday celebrations. Here's the challenge: they do not consider the couple's biological child their child/grandchild/niece and while not dismissive, it is obvious they are more connected to their birth child. As time goes on the differences are being noted by both children and ultimately no one knows how this will affect them psychologically in the long term.

This is not your situation, it is their situation and they are under no obligation to pretend for both kids. You don’t get it and you don’t get to define adoption for them. You are some random family member and sound off. Back off. When you call the child the adopted child, you clearly have not accepted them and are what op is talking about. You don’t consider this child part of the family. Thank goodness they have the other family.

Then why was the adoption even necessary?

That was my takeaway as well reading that. If the birth family has multiple grandparents/ aunts/ whoever visiting and calling on a regular basis, where were they when this child’s birth mother was signing all parenting rights away? They could have kept this child in their family and apparently elected not to. Seems odd?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an adoptee, I understand why it’s so annoying to always have that adjective mentioned. And I agree with you that there’s something very “othering” in the way some people speak about adoptees, particularly in the way they almost pathologically mention the adoption when mentioning the child. It gives the impression that the child doesn’t fully belong in their adoptive family, which is terribly cruel to the child.

But, it’s also true that we adoptees have two families: our first families and our adoptive families. And we belong - albeit in different ways - to both. So, yes, your adopted child is your child and not just your adopted child. They are also a child of their first family. It took me decades of therapy to find a way to have an integrated identity because my adoptive parents insisted I was “only” theirs, which your comments seem to suggest as well. Just watch for that with your adopted child. It can be very damaging too.

Thank you thank you thank you thank you for articulating this so perfectly. There are some adoptive parents who want to erase the fact that their children are adopted, pretend there is no difference, and erase the existence of an adopted child’s first family.

Children who join your family through adoption are already members of another family for their whole lives. If you do this right, you embrace that and allow your child to fully be part of both families, as part of their identity. You are the legal parent, and your child also has other parents. Whether or not you use the adjective “adopted”, do not erase your child’s full identity.

Who are you to define what adoption looks like for others? Believe it or not its 2022 and some families get along and have regular contact. And, those families all consider each other family. Its called open adoption.

And, no, my child has one set of parents.

But you have included his grandparents in your family? I am confused. What role do the birth parents have in your family?

This is where open adoption becomes challenging. In our situation the couple have a biological child and then adopted another child via an open adoption. The adopted child's birth family (mother, father, grandparents, siblings) are fully integrated into the family's life and have almost daily contact, visit weekly, and attend all holiday celebrations. Here's the challenge: they do not consider the couple's biological child their child/grandchild/niece and while not dismissive, it is obvious they are more connected to their birth child. As time goes on the differences are being noted by both children and ultimately no one knows how this will affect them psychologically in the long term.

This is not your situation, it is their situation and they are under no obligation to pretend for both kids. You don’t get it and you don’t get to define adoption for them. You are some random family member and sound off. Back off. When you call the child the adopted child, you clearly have not accepted them and are what op is talking about. You don’t consider this child part of the family. Thank goodness they have the other family.

Then why was the adoption even necessary?

I have a friend (we are in our 30s) who was adopted and she recently has been in contact with her birth moms family (her birth mom unfortunately is now deceased). They are all about frequent FaceTime calls and praising mother Mary that “their beloved grandbaby” has finally “made it back to them” and “they’ve prayed every night for her”. My friend is kind of like…. But when my birth mother was 15 and pregnant you weren’t exactly interested in keeping me, so why all the tears and prayers every day since I “left”? It’s unsettling to her and , in her words, is a constant reminder that they could have taken her in but chose not to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an adoptee, I understand why it’s so annoying to always have that adjective mentioned. And I agree with you that there’s something very “othering” in the way some people speak about adoptees, particularly in the way they almost pathologically mention the adoption when mentioning the child. It gives the impression that the child doesn’t fully belong in their adoptive family, which is terribly cruel to the child.

But, it’s also true that we adoptees have two families: our first families and our adoptive families. And we belong - albeit in different ways - to both. So, yes, your adopted child is your child and not just your adopted child. They are also a child of their first family. It took me decades of therapy to find a way to have an integrated identity because my adoptive parents insisted I was “only” theirs, which your comments seem to suggest as well. Just watch for that with your adopted child. It can be very damaging too.

Thank you thank you thank you thank you for articulating this so perfectly. There are some adoptive parents who want to erase the fact that their children are adopted, pretend there is no difference, and erase the existence of an adopted child’s first family.

Children who join your family through adoption are already members of another family for their whole lives. If you do this right, you embrace that and allow your child to fully be part of both families, as part of their identity. You are the legal parent, and your child also has other parents. Whether or not you use the adjective “adopted”, do not erase your child’s full identity.

Who are you to define what adoption looks like for others? Believe it or not its 2022 and some families get along and have regular contact. And, those families all consider each other family. Its called open adoption.

And, no, my child has one set of parents.

But you have included his grandparents in your family? I am confused. What role do the birth parents have in your family?

This is where open adoption becomes challenging. In our situation the couple have a biological child and then adopted another child via an open adoption. The adopted child's birth family (mother, father, grandparents, siblings) are fully integrated into the family's life and have almost daily contact, visit weekly, and attend all holiday celebrations. Here's the challenge: they do not consider the couple's biological child their child/grandchild/niece and while not dismissive, it is obvious they are more connected to their birth child. As time goes on the differences are being noted by both children and ultimately no one knows how this will affect them psychologically in the long term.

This is not your situation, it is their situation and they are under no obligation to pretend for both kids. You don’t get it and you don’t get to define adoption for them. You are some random family member and sound off. Back off. When you call the child the adopted child, you clearly have not accepted them and are what op is talking about. You don’t consider this child part of the family. Thank goodness they have the other family.

Then why was the adoption even necessary?

I have a friend (we are in our 30s) who was adopted and she recently has been in contact with her birth moms family (her birth mom unfortunately is now deceased). They are all about frequent FaceTime calls and praising mother Mary that “their beloved grandbaby” has finally “made it back to them” and “they’ve prayed every night for her”. My friend is kind of like…. But when my birth mother was 15 and pregnant you weren’t exactly interested in keeping me, so why all the tears and prayers every day since I “left”? It’s unsettling to her and , in her words, is a constant reminder that they could have taken her in but chose not to.

Perhaps your friend and her family were subjected to a hard-sell pitch from an adoption agency, who said the best thing for the child was to be taken away and raised by someone else. Not at all uncommon 30 years ago, or even today.