[mommy2fiveplus]

I have been on both sides of this arguement, being that I adopted a relative and I am a foster parent who has adopted my foster children and wondered if biofamily would come forward during the process. I can tell you that no matter how bonded you are to your foster children, they will eventually wonder why no one in thier first family wanted them enough to "fight" for them. I know this because I have 5 adopted brothers and know that some of them feel this way, because that was thier experience. The ones who don't feel this way were fought for by thier families, even though those families were not able to adopt them.

There are good arguements on either side of the issue. What you have to understand is that if you are truly doing what is in the best interest of the child like a true parent would, the side that adopts the child must acknowledge the very important impact the other family has/had on the child.

Foster-adopt is a hard row to hoe since there is often animosity between bio and foster families that make it difficult to pursue a open/loving relationship between families. This is NOT in the best interest of any child, adoption does not mean the child abandons his/her old family to embrace a new one, yet that is often what happens in foster adoptions (not all but many),

I have the privilege of telling my son (the not-previously related one) that his family wanted him and fought for him. Because I feel like bio heritage (not ethnicity or race, but familial history) is so important, I have tried to gather as much info about his bio family as possible. And while they made choices that will negatively efffect him forever and rendered them unable to care for him, I know that their mere existance will play a part in the development of his self-image. Because of this, I will always be open to communication between them and I , and perhaps one day between him and them, providing they can become safe and get past thier animosity towards me.

Likewise, I communicate with my son's (the one who is related) previous foster parents so they know how he is doing and could be involved in his life if they so choose.

No family, bio or foster is more/less important than the other. I think the family that can see this and offer the child the best of both worlds is the family that will best meet the needs of the child, and is that child's true family.

I guess what I am saying is "Are you willing to pursue a highly open/cooperative adoption with this child's extended bio family (who have not harmed him) as that is in the best interest of the child?"

If you can honestly accept that role, and prove to your child that his bio family is also important and worth maintaining than I think you have a right to fight for the CHILD's place in your family (not your place in the child's life).

IMHO, bonding (foster parent/child or other) is on equal footing to familial heritage because if a foster parent correctly/strongly bonded with his/her foster child then the ability of that child to bond with another caregiver has been developed and the child will succeed in a new enviroment if that is what is deemed most appropriate. That is not to say that the child will not suffer or grieve the loss of the foster family, only that that grief is equal to that suffered when a child losses his/her bio family/familial heritage.

Good luck with your child and try to see the situation from every angle, including the child's.