[silverqueenbee]

I am wondering if those of you that relinquished a child during the "closed adoption era", if things had been different then and the agencies told you the adoptee's original birth certificate would be released to the adoptee at 18 or 21 with your name on it, if that would have altered your decision in any way?

Would knowing your child would have access to your name (unless you filed to NOT have it released) when they reached adulthood have changed your decision? Is anonymity a large factor in the decision?

[sspete]

As a bmom of the early 1980's open adoptions were virtually unheard of!!! As an answer to your question......I hope and prayed for many, many years that my bdaughter knew my name and would find me as soon as she was ready!!!!! I would have LOVED to have had an open adoption, but sadly enough it did not work out that way!!!! Never would I have hid from her on purpose!!!!!

S Pete

[Dragonfly82]

No it would have not changed my decision. I wanted to be found.

[debsdone]

I will answer for my birthmom. She went so far as to give a fake name at my birth, to insure she wouldn't be found. Now that she has been found, and I found out I had another brother, she has asked that I not tell him who or where she is, should I find him. Unfortunately, the birthmothers who share mine's point of view, will remain unheard, as they wouldn't be here at this site. My sister in law is another who feels the same. Neither woman would participate in an adoption related board. As unfortunate as it seems, in my family.....adopted AND birth....this seems to be the norm! Debi

[Jackiejdajda]

>Is anonymity a large factor in the decision?

I was doing what I was told to do. The secret of my pregnancy had to be kept. I had to hide out when I was 'showing'.

I did not tell my sister for many years..

So to answer your question.. Yes anonymity (for my family) was a large factor in the decision..


Jackie

[pjinokeechobee]

I have wished everyday for the last 21years that it could be that way that way the long search would not have to happen and when she was ready she would have all she needed to find me! That would be a dream come true for me! As well as alot of adoptees and other bmom's.

[BABSNVA52]

My Daughter was born in 1970 and no such thing as ooen adoption.
I have forever prayed that my daughter would find me.
I get so tired of hearing that the main reason for closed adoptions was for the protection of the Birthmother.
Don't forget, WE were FORCED to give our chhildren up, by our parents and Society.
I have been a member of two birthmother's groups for 2 and a half years with 100's of birthmothers and not one gave theirs up
by choice. I have read that there are a few that don't want to be found, but the majority do.

Barbara

[shirleyville]

Babs,
I don't think you can actually make a blanket statement that says

Don't forget, WE were FORCED to give our chhildren up, by our parents and Society.

just because the birthmothers groups you belong to don't have any members who chose to give up their children freely.

I have been a member of two birthmother's groups for 2 and a half years with 100's of birthmothers and not one gave theirs up by choice

As Deb pointed out, those who relinquished freely don't usually join support groups, or post to forums like this. They were happy with the decisions they made, and continue to BE happy with them now. They don't have a need be out there seeking support or being active in groups because they are perfectly happy with the choices they made and have gone on to live wonderful, happy lives. There's not a thing wrong with that....it's as it should be for them.
I was born in 1964 and there was absolutely no such thing as "open adoption".....my birthmother was 21 years old when she gave birth to me. She had no desire to parent at that time and she gave me up freely. Anonymity was of UTMOST importance to her...she had NO DESIRE to be "found". She totally wigged out when my CI contacted her, and she denied any form of contact with me. She even had all the paperwork from the state sent to her sister's house, so there would be no chance of her own address being on anything.
So, in short, not "ALL" birthmothers were "FORCED" to give up their children by their parents and society. Many did so of their own free will and are quite happy having done so -- my own, included.
Hugs,
Sally

[shirleyville]

Reunited,
Sorry to confuse issues.....
No, I haven't spoken to Mary Ellen directly. My information about her relinquishment comes from my CI, my aunt and my cousin. Mary Ellen lived with my aunt at the time I was born, and my aunt was with her at the hospital when I was born. I have no reason, based on Mary Ellen's actions, at the time of my contact, or now, to believe that she ever wanted or desired to be "found". She didn't want to parent my sister, either....she was born right after me, and my grandmother took her in for several years until Mary Ellen finally married her present husband. She was perfectly willing to put Debbie up for adoption at the time, but my grandmother stepped in and said she wouldn't allow another one of "hers" to be sent away.
My whole point was just to say that not ALL birthmoms were coerced and forced to relinquish their children......some were perfectly happy with the decisions they made. Their "side of the story" is rarely recounted because the birthmothers who relinquished freely made a decision that was right for them. They aren't in pain today.....they aren't out here, looking for support because they don't NEED any. I am thankful for that -- there is far too much pain in the world today as it is! I am glad when people make good decisions for themselves and continue to be happy with them many years down the road!
Hugs,
Sally

[Sharon]

"those who relinquished freely don't usually join support groups, or post to forums like this. They were happy with the decisions they made, and continue to BE happy with them now. They don't have a need be out there seeking support or being active in groups because they are perfectly happy with the choices they made and have gone on to live wonderful, happy lives." ~ Shirleyville

Sally, I've known you for awhile now, and I respect you immensely. I agree that Babs's post may have been a "blanket statement", and I can see why it bothered you, considering your situation... after all, you KNOW for a FACT that Babs's theory is not applicable to your birthmother... therefore, such statements seem dismissive of you and other adoptees who did not find their birthmothers to be hapless victims of forced relinquishment, pining away for their lost children.
However. Your response was ALSO a blanket statement. MANY of us on this forum (I assume that's what you meant by "support groups") relinquished freely. I can't imagine that any human would be "happy" with such a decision... giving up your child forever because you are unable to care for it is no cause for celebration, regardless of whether or not you did it of your own free will. There may be some birthmothers who are more at peace with their decision than others, but come on... "perfectly happy"? "No need to seek support"? "Gone on to lead wonderful, happy lives?"
I think not. According to your posts, your birthmother is afraid of her own shadow, and TERRIFIED of you. Does this really seem like the attitude of someone who is "perfectly happy" and is leading a "wonderful, happy life"?
I'm not trying to pick on you, and I DO understand why you responded the way you did... but things are just not as black-and-white as some people would like to believe. It's not either/ or.
A birthmother can admit she relinquished freely, and still be sad and seek support. A birthmother can be in such deep denial that she refuses to admit (even to herself) that she ever placed a child for adoption... a person like this obviously would not be seeking out support forums, yet this doesn't mean she's "happy with her choice" nor that she's leading a "wonderful life".
There are many, many variations. A crisis pregnancy followed by relinquishment could not possibly be classified, however, as "happy" for anyone other than the aparents, and possibly the adoptee, who might be happy that she was able to have a better life than her birthmother could've provided her with. Birthmoms are not two-dimensional cardboard cut-outs. We are human beings, subject to the full range of human motivations and emotions. A person might have a child, give it up (by force or by choice), and at some point in her life feel happy again. But that doesn't mean that she's happy about having to make that choice. It's difficult and horrible, no matter how you look at it. It's a traumatic event. It's not something a person is going to look back on later and say, "Boy, what fun!" Because you live through something like that and survive does not mean that you're happy about it, nor that you don't NEED support, whether or not you actively seek it.
Best, ~ Shar

[dl]

I've known you for awhile now, and I respect you immensely also. However, I agree with shirleyville's post. Many of us adoptees have found a different reality than the "coerced" bmother. Personally, I don't feel that a woman/girl that becomes pregnant at a time when she is unable to parent a child is necessarily "forced or coerced" by anything other than the reality of her situation. There was someone that posted this morning that she was "coerced" because she was 15 and would have been unable to provide even food or shelter for herself or her child if she had kept her child. Sad, yes. Painful, yes. Any choice in that type of situation, No. Is that "coercion"? Not the way I see it. It's making a decision based on the reality of the situation.

Many adoptees have discovered that we were the result of an extra marital affair. Perhaps our bmothers were not "happy" to relinquish us, but it does seem that they were "relieved" to have "their problem" done with. Part of their past. I don't necessarily think that shirleyvilles Mother is "terrified" of HER. I think she is terrified of the fact of her own previous behavior becoming known to her other children, as well as others in her life. I personally believe, based on my own discovery and the discovery of many other adoptees that post on the forum that there are indeed many bmothers that put the experience behind and did move on with their lives. They felt safe that it was behind them and when contacted, the desire to protect THEMSELVES and their reputation is more important than the needs of the child they placed so long ago.

I'm not making a blanket statement. I realize from my many months on the forum that there are bmothers that do long to hear from their "placed for adoption children". That is actually what encouraged me to search. But, I have seen many adoptees post with extreme pain that what they discovered to be their truth, was not the warm, loving bmother that they see post on the forum. I think it's important for all to acknowledge that other realities do exist.

[Sharon]

DLouis,
I agree with you about the "forced and coerced" bmom thing... in fact, I chewed somebody out this morning on the "So angry I could vomit" thread for stating that "all birthmothers are forced, coerced, and lied to". It's garbage, we all know it, and it hurts the credibility of all bmoms when people insist on making such statements.
But, "happy"?
No. I cannot accept that any mother could be happy about going through such a thing... it's wretched. I won't argue further; I care about both you and Sally, but on this one issue, we'll just have to agree to disagree. We're each looking at it from such different perspectives, it might be impossible for us to see eye to eye in this case.
Respectfully, ~ Shar

[dl]

While I agree with shirleyville's post, I did qualify the "happy" statement with "Perhaps our bmothers were not "happy" to relinquish us, but it does seem that they were "relieved" to have "their problem" done with." I personally don't believe that any woman could be "happy" to relinquish a child. "Relieved" to have what she views as a problem behind her forever, yes ~ I can understand that. "Happy", no ~ I can't believe any woman would be "happy" about relinquishing her own flesh and blood. We may need to "agree to disagree" on other things but we are in agreement here.

Most respectfully to you too! ~ dl

[debsdone]

Although therapy is widely accepted, and support groups are popular, I firmly believe that "we" (here on these boards) are a minority among our peers. Please let me qualify that by adding that "we" are the healthier, more enlightened ones! just kidding, kinda. Jeesh SO many people in this world experience trauma. They deal with it in a variety of ways. I think it is another "popular" trend to simply NOT dwell on something and move along. Now I personally believe that isn't healthy, but in keeping with my belief in "choice" I have to accept that it seems to work for some people. My birthmom is NOT happy to be found. Her secret would have died with her, and that would have been fine with her. Having been found, she is kind to me, but does NOT want to deal with my brother. So whatever works, right? This subject is as personal as any. I KNOW I stepped out of my comfort zone when I came to these boards. But that is how I have always operated, digging for the root of things, nosy I guess. (relentless my husband says) But I have to maintain my objectivity and allow for other ways to "cope". Perhaps my birthmom's life would have been better without all her secrets. But she made her choices freely, WITHOUT coercion. Bottom line? We simply don't know what the HUGE number of triad members, outside of therapy and support groups, really feel. But I believe we have to respectfully accept that they simply don't feel the need for support......for whatever reason. And wish them well! Love, Debi

[patrisha]

As several others have pointed out the very nature of most of the participants on this forum will favorably weight the feedback on this question. It is an unfortunate side effect that the searching birth mothers are expecting to find children like Debi, Dlouis, and Shirleyville; adoptees are hoping to find birth mom's like Shar, Jackie and SPete. To everyone's credit, there has been many very understanding shoulders to cry on, and plenty of helpful insight to make the successful reunions even better.

I do think I understand what Barbara was saying since I am a birth mom from the same era. I won't retell my story, but the social pressure to abandon any idea of single motherhood was incredible. Even a few more "post Woodstock" years made a huge difference in public acceptance and family support. I know several birth mothers that did believe they placed their child "of their own free will". There was no such thing for most young woman. We had barely evolved past the June Cleaver era. Of course that doesn't mean that some birth moms didn't deal with it better than others, move on with their life, and have no real desire to face it again.

The question back then was not so much "would it have altered my thinking", as "would it have altered the adoptive family's thinking". Most everything that was done, was done with the new adoptive family's best interests in mind. Remember, neither family donor required transplants nor genetic links to many diseases had been discovered yet.

Trish