[Missy M]

[b][quote]Originally posted by dpen6
Saramurphy,

Just a couple of points I want to make...

I understand you wanting to support shattered dreams. I do to. It is usually ok for the child to stay with bmom IF they truly believe they can do it. It usually is best for baby and mom.

*** Yes ...


But, as an adoptee I DO NOT consider it barbaric for my bmom to realize that she could not parent me and MADE ME AVAILABLE (after 2 years in foster care) for adoption. I take offense to anyone calling them adopters, they are my mom and Dad. There are many bmoms that should not parent or can not parent at the time of birth...in the childs best interest it is also very courageous and mature for the birtmom to realize that.

*** I don't know the specifics of your foster care and your mother. It's possible that she worked very hard to try to make it possible to keep you for two years. Many, many infant adoptions are a permanent solution to a temporary problem, and "temporary" can almost always be read "financial". As I said, I do not know her specifics, but the two-year timeline is intriguing.

*** Please do not misread my use of the term "adopter". It is the legal term and I use it to keep all the characters straight. While they may be your mom and dad, they aren't mine! LOL. It's simply the legal term to identify their role.

*** The pregnant woman may not be making decisions out of courage and maturity, but out of despair and lack of options. There may be other ways to address that than losing one's child forever.

Thanks,
Sara


Last edited by saramurphy on 02-17-2004 at 08:35 PM

Ok I have successfully moved this post and started a new thread unattached from the former posts....MissyM

[Missy M]

As a b-mom I take issue with my daughters placement being defined as a "temporary problem*. It wasn't; it was a immediate need that required a permanent resolution. My daughter wasn't a "too expensive" winter coat that I could put in lay-a-way until I could afford her, she was a living breathing human being that deserved a 2 parent family that had the desire, love, time, money, mauturity and everything else she needed from day one.
I have stated this before but will do so again; I was never "too poor" to parent my child. My parents were both Dr.'s; my Dad an Ed. Phd. and my Mom an Orthodonist. My paternal Grandad was an Attorney, my maternal Grandad a dentist too. Money has never ever been an issue for us, I grew up in a gated community with a pool, tennis courts, ballet lessons, horse stables etc. All of this was made all the more special because we are AA. My family was/is very prominate and very wealthy. My Great- Grandparents discovered oil on their property appox. 80 years ago and its been flowing ever since.
I had all the money I needed and other options such as an Aunt who was unable to concieve and a former Nanny who would have accepted $200.00 a week to care for my daughter. I placed my daughter because I was emotionally unprepared to raise her and I was not going to gamble on her being OK until I became so.
By saying that there are other ways to address this issue other than adoption in this forum is very tasteless and disrespectful. I ask you what your point in saying that is? MissyM

[dl]

Posted by "saramurphy" on the thread that created this "transferred thread".

I understand that adopters want children and have to look to other women to give them children, but it seems so barbaric to me.

As I spent 13 months in foster care after being left at the hospital by my bioparents, I do not agree with your blanket statement that my parents (I refuse to use what I feel is a very insulting term to describe them ~ adopters) participated in anything remotely close to "barbaric".

While I understand your usage of the statement "permanent solution to a temporary problem" being used as a negative in regards to adoption, I ask that "temporary" be defined. Obviously you do not feel that TWO YEARS is considered "temporary" . Exactly how long to you feel a child's needs should be considered "temporary" ?

As "Missy M" stated:

it was a immediate need that required a permanent resolution. My daughter wasn't a "too expensive" winter coat that I could put in lay-a-way until I could afford her, she was a living breathing human being that deserved a 2 parent family that had the desire, love, time, money, maturity and everything else she needed from day one.

A child's needs are not something that can or should be put on hold, IMO.

[jenniperg]

I understand that adopters want children and have to look to other women to give them children, but it seems so barbaric to me.


This makes me think of something that a dear, devout Christian friend told me recently. Although I am not a Christian, he thought I would find it interesting that in the discussions they have been having in his Bible class, they have been discussing the notion that both Joseph and God adopted Jesus, in different ways of course. I don't know the exact quotes that started this, but they have been really enjoying developing this topic. Hardly barbaric.

Don't mean to start a whole religious debate, but I find it hard to believe that ANY adoption is barbaric. My birthmother put my needs before hers when she placed me, and by doing that, she gave my parents and me a tremendous gift. That's not being a barbarian, that's unconditional love.

[Missy M]

" Don't mean to start a whole religious debate, but I find it hard to believe that ANY adoption is barbaric. My birthmother put my needs before hers when she placed me, and by doing that, she gave my parents and me a tremendous gift. That's not being a barbarian, that's unconditional love."


As a Reunited BirthMom, from the bottom of my heart I thank you...MissyM

[MkMw]

Missy M and DLouis -

You have both very nicely summed up alot of how I feel, but couldn't articulate regarding the permanent solution to a temporary problem. Missy - I've read many of your posts before, but had never read your whole story.

2 other points (and I may edit or delete this later, I've becom leary about sharing too much on-line in a "permanent" fashion). I don't know *all* the reasons my sons' birthmom chose to place them - only what she told me. BUT she did not lose them forever, even though she is in South Africa and we are in the U.S. I EXPECT that one day my (our) kids will have a relationship with her - the depth, type or timing of that relationship is a great unknown....Second, I never heard her refer to them as a problem, an inconvenience, or a mistake and I NEVER will they are the greatest 2 kids in the world (I'm completely unbiased of course). She made some bad choices. She worked really really REALLY hard to "fix" them and stay in the "active parent" role. She had an exemplary (sp?) pregnancy and a loving family.

What she didn't have was a job, time, money, or a place to live. When we left SA she had a good job. She worked 50 hours a week (on her feet) - that doesn't count commute time. She made about what it would cost her in daycare expenses (2 infants). The government would give her almost enough money to feed the babies. She was worried that her children WOULD go into foster care (not by her choice), and that they WOULD be separated from each other as well as her. She made a very difficult choice. Our sons were never in foster care - we took them home from the hospital when they were 16 days and kept them during the 60 day period that most babies were put into foster care. And I can tell you, I can't imagine trying to work full time even now and meet their needs.

You are right - money is NOT everything. My kids have hundreds of dollars of toys. And, like every other "kid" in the world, their favorites are empty cardboard boxes, sticks, mud, and banging on my pots and pans. BUT it (money) has given me the freedom to have the TIME to give them what they needed and need as babies. Babies are only babies for a few years, and it is the neediest time of their life. Why is it "barbaric" to make sure they have what they need when they need it the most?

Anyway - I hope this makes some sort of sense, I've spent alot of time thinking about the "money" issue lately, and I think that often it is scapegoat - an easy thing to blame. I'm always reminded of my Psych. teacher in high school, she told us to never blame not going to college on not having the money - that if you want something bad enough, you'll figure out a way to pay for it. I'm not comparing the 2 - looking for employment when you are pregnant or a new mother is much more challenging - but it may be a factor.

[dadfor2]

a woman who puts her child up for adoption is the most unselfish act i can think of. To put the childs needs before her own.

I cant imagine the agony and the pain that a woman has to go through to led her up to that decision.

barbaric, i dont think so.


on another side:

I think about my childs birthmom, she was mentally ill, abused my children on numerous occasions. My children has paid a huge price due to it.

but i still do have empathy for her. She was mentally ill. She couldnt help it, Im sure she loved her children, but just was uncapable of taking care of them.

I hope as my children get older, and their birthmom gets the help she needs, that i will help them find her. and i will be there to comfort them if the reunion doesnt go great, and i will rejoice with them, if it goes great.

dadfor2

[HappyMomAnna]

As an adoptive mother I see our situation as a

temporary solution to a permanent problem

I know that my children will one day want to have contact with their birthmother and my only prayer--hope and desire is that by the time they do want to contact her she will be healthy and OK and they will have a chance to know her.

Our birthmother reliquished one child on her own free will and then gave birth to our daughter whom lived for four years in a shopping cart on the streets. Many support services were offered and not accepted by the birthmother. Housing, food, counceling, child care, mental health service, drug treatment, medical care, and support services galore. Four years later a drug addicted baby was born. The children suffered and the situation was permanent with no change in sight.

This summer a fourth baby was born in the woods.

I gave birth to two children and raised both of them and certainly had no compelling reason to raise anymore. I have no NEED to be a mother--no reason to want another womans children!

I have a need to END a cycle and hopefully change their future by being a parent. ALL CHILDREN GROW UP AND MOVE ON. No child is property and none of us own a child. ALL PARENTS ARE TEMPS!

I feel that a woman has every right to do her very best for her child and if she chooses to raise her child our society does in fact provide many supportive means to do so. I was a 20 year old mother myself and I know it is hard to be a mother and it takes every moment of every day to give our children the very best life we can offer them.

I have watched even members of my own family view their children as property and raise them in caotic distructive lives. Children are adorable when they are little and helpless and need mommies to feed them and care for them. Children are not that cute when they have lived 12 years as a opeice of property with little or no care.

In a perfect world all babies would be wanted, loved and raised by the parents who created them. It is NOT a perfect world.

A birthmother should feel NO SHAME in realizing that her baby might need more then she is able to provide. It is a selfless act when a birthmother comes to understand this and allows her baby to be loved and cared for by parents who WANT that child.

Adopters if this is the term we are using here do not always adopt because they wish to own a child. Many adoptive parents do so because they are able to provide temporairy care for the permenant life of a future adult.

There is simply NO BALCK and WHITE to these issues there are only PEOPLE.

[patrisha]

I guess I missed the point when the previous thread went "off topic". I also missed the post where the practice of adoption was called barbaric. IMHO it's only as barbaric or humane as the involved parties make it.

IMHO one "barbaric" practice associated with adoption is when family members or professionals stupe to using guilt tactics to convince a young pregnant woman that if is she " really loved and wanted what was best for her baby", she would place it for adoption. Often these do-gooders have a personal agenda. I have the distinct impression that the young woman that posted her change of mind on the other thread initially was given a lot more "encouragement" to place her child, then she did offers of support and parenting plans.

I also believe that if everyone in this country waited until they could "afford" to have children, we'd have alot of 40 year old first time mama's. It's nice to be able to stay home with new baby's, but judging from the number of care centers opening up, it's not as possible as it once was. My neice is a single parent on a very limited income, and her son is one of the happiest and well rounded little boys I have ever had the pleasure of babysitting.

Trish

[MkMw]

Trish -

I don't think ANYONE her would ever call coercion a good thing. I didn't coerce my sons' birthmom and based on the questions, comments *I* got at the hospital would bet she didn't get any coercion there. The city they were born has a population of 2.5 million there are 10 non-family adoptions a year.

As far as money there is a big difference between "Limited" income and "no" income. It doesn't take a fortune to be able to raise kids, but the ability to feed and properly clothe them (as in for the weather, not the "runway") is very important. The *help* the government could offer my sons' birthmom would not have kept them in formula - much less diapers.

And as far as labeling adoption as barbaric - the real crux of the quote was that adoptive parents are barbaric. I wonder how my sons' Birthmom, who I have a ton of respect for, would feel to know that someone things the parents SHE chose to raise her kids are barbarians.

[Missy M]

Patrisha...you said:
"I have the distinct impression that the young woman that posted her change of mind on the other thread initially was given a lot more "encouragement" to place her child, then she did offers of support and parenting plans. "

While I am honestly trying to avoid including that poster here, I want to say that your impression is incorrect. While I did ask certain questions regarding her decision, I nor anyone else I saw offered her any "encouragement" to place. Its unfair of you to assume that, but as a b-mom, even if we'd done just that it would not have been out of line. You post as if adoption is this evil lurking monster and it isn't.
IMO, offers of support from a forum online are not something I would have depended on as I made plans to keep or place; neither were food stamps, a crib, a car seat, WIC, various relatives, welfare or anything else to help us "get by." I wanted more for my daughter than just to have her "get by." I was never "too poor" to parent her and neither did our money make up for the other things I lacked. Someone needs to hear me say that it wasn't about money; thats the one thing I did have. My child needed parents who were awaiting her birth and were fully prepared to raise her. I wasn't and she couldn't wait on me to become ready. I was not selfish enough to believe that staying with me no matter what she'd have to endure was her best option. Tell that to a child who went to bed hungry last night, or who's mom is so immature that she gave him cow's milk at 3 weeks, or the child who's young mom is still partying so she leaves him home alone at age 3. Just because my body was mature enough to concieve a child did not mean my mind was mature enough to raise a child. My baby needed a better Mom than I was able to be at that time.
I am never going to believe that keeping Tovia would have been best for Tovia, it wasn't....MissyM

[Wingless]

Maybe my two cents worth at this point isn't going to make a difference.... but I just feel I have to say this:

HappyMomAnna wrote ....
I gave birth to two children and raised both of them and certainly had no compelling reason to raise anymore. I have no NEED to be a mother--no reason to want another womans children!

I have a need to END a cycle and hopefully change their future by being a parent. ALL CHILDREN GROW UP AND MOVE ON. No child is property and none of us own a child. ALL PARENTS ARE TEMPS!

THANK YOU ANNA!

I am a parent. I am days away from being a birth parent. They are not one in the same.

The adoptive parents that are "waiting", just as I am, for the birth of their first child have not in anyway become monsterious vultures because life has left them unable to conceive. They are not looking to raise a child to call their own as a status symbol, as a token of fertility, as some prize to make their family's proud. They long for nothing more then to be a part of the world called parenting. There is something beautiful about being a part of the hand that guides a child from infancy to adulthood. Wanting to be a part of that is far from barbaric!

I am not "placing" a child because I am financially unable to care for him/her. I was not forced by anyone to make an adoption plan. I in fact! walked away from an agency that could not see my desire to make an adoption plan that didn't fit into the "standard" agency role.

I have never not wanted this child. I see life as an amazing gift (I get to see it everyday in my four children .. sometimes even at all hours of the night. lol) I have wanted all the things first time birthmoms want, all the things adoptive parents want, all the things this world wants.... a healthy, happy, well adjusted little person who's start at life was embraced by a roomful of people that love him before even meeting him.

I am joyfully waiting the arrival of a new life. A life I have decided not to be an active parent to. I have been attacked and honored on each side of the triad for my openness about my situation. Because I am already a mother to four.. I had one poster flat out say that my mothering ability to my children should be in question if I can so happily place this child. I have been told that my age (31) makes it so I should never even have considered adoption. I have been told this child will hate me for deciding to give life, but not raise him myself.

And the other side has told me to keep my chin up and know what I am doing is an act of unconditional love. The many hopeful adoptive parents waiting for their chance to be a part of this magical world have offered encouragement that they can only hope to find a birthmother who has become so sure of their decision and love for a child.

Am I going to burn in hell or get a special invitation from St. Peter one day? I guess it depends on what side of the fence you stand and judge. For me... I have no fears in facing my judgement. I have made my peace, and even learned a lot about myself from all of this.

Adoption is an option. Parenting is an option. Aborting is an option. I will not stand and throw stones at a single person that makes any of those choices for themselves or their child. Nor can I wrong a person that starts on one path, and decides they need to start a different one. It isn't easy. There are no clear cut answers in life ... my word, if there were we'd all be perfect and hopefully far less judgemental to what others have chose to do!

There are many here that raise their voices to the mistreatment and misconceptions that surround the world of adoption. For whatever reasons, I have found myself amoung this group. I can not offer "education" on matters that come from the heart. I can offer my story, my reasons, my insights on why I came to where I am now. If in doing so, I give strength to someone that needs it or hope to someone that feels none, then my place in the triad is worth it. I will forever be touched by adoption.

[Missy M]

Your post brought tears to my eyes; not because I felt you were a saint or a sinner, but because I thought you were speaking for me. You posted:

I am joyfully waiting the arrival of a new life. A life I have decided not to be an active parent to. I have been attacked and honored on each side of the triad for my openness about my situation. Because I am already a mother to four.. I had one poster flat out say that my mothering ability to my children should be in question if I can so happily place this child. I have been told that my age (31) makes it so I should never even have considered adoption. I have been told this child will hate me for deciding to give life, but not raise him myself.


I placed my 2nd daughter after deciding to parent my first. I was also told that since I didn't "feel able" to parent the 2nd, my firstborn should have been removed from my care. I was also told Tovia would hate me since I "proved" my abilities to parent by raising her sister sucessfully and had two other kids after placing her. I made the choice to place her based on who I was at that second, not who I wished to be or might someday become. I didn't think she had to wait on minute on me to become stable enough to parent her, she needed a mother then and there; and I gave her to one. My main responsibility as a parent to my girls was to provide them with the best that life has to offer. In my heart of hearts, I honestly feel that I did exactly that and I have no regrets about either decisison....MissyM

[redhedded]

It touched me deeply, in ways that I cannot articulate.

Missy, I always appreciate your honesty and conviction.

[CeraDad]

I can honestly say that when we met our daughter bmom, we encouraged her to make the best decision for the baby. Whether it was for her to keep her or place her with an adoptive family. Even if it wasn't with us. She needed to feel comfortable with the decision. Adoption is hardly "barbaric". Just the opposite. The fact that strangers are willing and lining up to take care of other peoples children as their own flesh and blood (not entirely sure that is coming out right. But as I am an adoptee and adoptive father, I think I can get away with it), makes it the way God would want it.

Sorry about some of the comments. As I said, not sure they came out properly, but hopefully you all get the jist of what I'm trying to get across.