Anonymous wrote:She's been asked to leave them alone. That's what she needs to do.

Personally I would be looking into a non-contact order.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A legal form does not, and cannot, negate a biological event. A document can't even maintain a marriage much less a birth. A legal form diesn't supersede an egg or a sperm..it doesn't change it with a new last name.

Try saying this on a thread about transgendered people!

Anonymous wrote:A legal form does not, and cannot, negate a biological event. A document can't even maintain a marriage much less a birth. A legal form diesn't supersede an egg or a sperm..it doesn't change it with a new last name.

Anonymous wrote:I totally sympathize with your sister but I think she should leave it alone. 1) if her birth mother wanted to find her she probably would have 2) Unless she needs some sort of vital health information then she should respect her privacy. Especially considering the birth mother did not herself utilize these websites.

That said, I am going to have to give a gigantic eye roll to her birth mothers family. I am on AncestryDNA and 23 and me and you literally opt into allowing yourself to be linked to your dna relatives. If potentially finding family members you don’t want to find is a problem then don’t do it. They’re acting like she hired a PI to go through there trash to find a dna sample when the reality is they are dummies who waived their privacy and didn’t like the consequences.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I always thought adoption was a nice thing and was quietly against abortions.

After reading this thread, my opinion has changed

It just shows that despite your best intentions, the baby you give birth to might turn out with no moral compass. You can’t control how they’re raised. They might come back to try to destroy your life and family with their crazy sense of entitlement. And their family might support them on that.



Definitely one of the more depressing threads I’ve ever read on DCUM.

There are thousands of stories where the adopted child returned, and no one's life was ruined. Ruination only comes from secrets, denial, and lies.When someone is shamed, they have to live in fear.

We need to understand that the idea of a closed adoption has largely passed. An open adoption acknowledges who is who, while allowing all parties to make the best decision for a child without resorting to hidden information, lies, secrets. That serves no one. If two people have a child, they have the full right to give up their parental right, but the fact that it happened is never expunged. The birth is avknowledged, the mother is not shamed, the birth father is also acknowledged and a part of the process, not some shadowy figure absolved of all responsibility because it wasn't evident to anyone. Instead these people are honored for their gift and their responsibility- not their dirty little secret. Life ahead will be much more affirming for all. This is a good thing.

Going forward, sure. We should not be undoing the decisions that were made when a woman's privacy is on the line. So wrong to do that to someone, based on today's thinking.

LOL Sounds like all the women who gave birth pre-2015 are basically having vapors about being 'found out'. Your discomfort doesn't negate a child's need to know who they are.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I always thought adoption was a nice thing and was quietly against abortions.

After reading this thread, my opinion has changed

It just shows that despite your best intentions, the baby you give birth to might turn out with no moral compass. You can’t control how they’re raised. They might come back to try to destroy your life and family with their crazy sense of entitlement. And their family might support them on that.



Definitely one of the more depressing threads I’ve ever read on DCUM.

There are thousands of stories where the adopted child returned, and no one's life was ruined. Ruination only comes from secrets, denial, and lies.When someone is shamed, they have to live in fear.

We need to understand that the idea of a closed adoption has largely passed. An open adoption acknowledges who is who, while allowing all parties to make the best decision for a child without resorting to hidden information, lies, secrets. That serves no one. If two people have a child, they have the full right to give up their parental right, but the fact that it happened is never expunged. The birth is avknowledged, the mother is not shamed, the birth father is also acknowledged and a part of the process, not some shadowy figure absolved of all responsibility because it wasn't evident to anyone. Instead these people are honored for their gift and their responsibility- not their dirty little secret. Life ahead will be much more affirming for all. This is a good thing.

Going forward, sure. We should not be undoing the decisions that were made when a woman's privacy is on the line. So wrong to do that to someone, based on today's thinking.

LOL Sounds like all the women who gave birth pre-2015 are basically having vapors about being 'found out'. Your discomfort doesn't negate a child's need to know who they are.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I always thought adoption was a nice thing and was quietly against abortions.

After reading this thread, my opinion has changed

It just shows that despite your best intentions, the baby you give birth to might turn out with no moral compass. You can’t control how they’re raised. They might come back to try to destroy your life and family with their crazy sense of entitlement. And their family might support them on that.



Definitely one of the more depressing threads I’ve ever read on DCUM.

There are thousands of stories where the adopted child returned, and no one's life was ruined. Ruination only comes from secrets, denial, and lies.When someone is shamed, they have to live in fear.

We need to understand that the idea of a closed adoption has largely passed. An open adoption acknowledges who is who, while allowing all parties to make the best decision for a child without resorting to hidden information, lies, secrets. That serves no one. If two people have a child, they have the full right to give up their parental right, but the fact that it happened is never expunged. The birth is avknowledged, the mother is not shamed, the birth father is also acknowledged and a part of the process, not some shadowy figure absolved of all responsibility because it wasn't evident to anyone. Instead these people are honored for their gift and their responsibility- not their dirty little secret. Life ahead will be much more affirming for all. This is a good thing.

Going forward, sure. We should not be undoing the decisions that were made when a woman's privacy is on the line. So wrong to do that to someone, based on today's thinking.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your sister's curiosity is understandable but she is dead wrong. Trying to find and contact her birth mother is one thing, but contacting the woman's family is a violation on so many levels it boggles my mind.

“The woman’s family” is her family also.

Sharing DNA doesn't make them family. The adoptee's family are the people who raised her.

It does when it pertains to medical history. She could be suceptible to any number of medical illnesses and not know it with no blood relations to confer with.

I don't know why people keep saying this. Even in closed adoptions, medical history is provided as a background as part of that process. Just as there are new technologies people are using to find people that are related by blood, there are also new advances in genetic testing that provide for medical screenings. This argument is smoke and mirrors.

Nowhere in OPs post is she suggesting that her sister is stalking people because she really needs her medical history.

And frankly, this whole thread is disturbing. You champion for women's rights and individual's right to privacy and also champion for the great cause of not aborting but rather giving life and providing blessings to those that can't have kids and now birth moms who want to continue to keep her private life private are horrible and selfish and liars?

If anyone comes to this thread perhaps thinking of their own options, they would run to an abortion clinic.