[mamottawa]

Recently, after completing many university essays, i decided to read something often mentionned on this forum, and that was the book " Primal Wound" by nancy verrier. I must say that parts of the book are interesting, but something is also unsettling about it.

I am a 23 year old adoptee who had a great life ( and still does) with wonderful friends, a solid relationship with my parents, so when i read the thesis that adoptees are somehow " wounded", i can't help but feel like its too general and doesn't render justice to all adoptees or members of the triad. I hate to feel like a victim somehow. Not everything in behaviour can be explained by adoption. Some may have had a tougher adoption, and for those i trully feel sorry, but it can't be said that all adoptees are wounded somehow. And using the " you are not aware" seems more like an easy excuse, or at least i wasn't completely convinced.

Maybe i'm affected in some regard by the adoption issu, but it doesn't affect my relationships with others in my family, or my friends or girlfriend. I dont necessarily feel sad or depressed or anything, i don't feel sad or angry about being adopted, its no big deal for me, so i feel very uneasy about being pitied or caracterized as a "victim" or "wounded".

Of course, i don't study in psychology or anything like that, and i would hate to make those who do study behaviour feel like their discipline is being thrown out or disconsidered. However i am not convinced empirical evidence can be justified for all adoptees. I was adopted as a baby, so have no memory of what happened. Am i curious about what happened? you betcha, and i wouldn't mind finding my birthmother ( already have her name) but if i don't, life goes on and its no big deal. But that's just one part of myself, it doesn't define everything. That's the impression i had reading her book.


Its interesting reading for sure, but it feels too generalizing for me to recognize myself in it.