[cvalda]

I love all the forums here, and love reading about people's experiences, etc on several of the forums.

But one thing that always saddens me a little bit is when people refer to their adopted or foster kids as "not normal".

What is normal, exactly? A child who's been through terrible abuse, been pulled away from the only life he or she has known, has possibly gone through many placements... would NOT be "normal" if they were just a happy go lucky, well behaved, well adjusted kid. A kid in that sitaution... it is "normal" for them to have attachment, anger, emotional issues, etc. That IS normal to be scared, to act out, to be confused...

To me, every child is different and unique. There are no cookie cutter personalities, even amongst children born and raised in their biological family. You can have a family of 10 birth children raised by a loving mother, and still have them each respond to situations differently, etc. There is no such thing as "normal" to me. Just because a child is in foster care or has been adopted does not mean they aren't "normal". They have just had different experiences. They are unique individuals. They respond in their own way. That alone is "normal".

I know it's a matter of personal perspective, but it really makes me sad to think people might not think my children are "normal" just because they've been adopted... they may have attachment issues... ADHD... borderline ODD... It's even sadder coming from the adoption community.

Just my two cents; it has been on my heart to talk about this. I'm not accusing anyone and don't want to instigate an arguement. Just wanted to let my thoughts be known.

;~) Kelly

[Synesthesia]

I always wonder the same thing. It seems to me that a lot of problems children who have been abused have are normal reactions to horrible situations.

Especially after reading this book called Raising Blaze where this woman had an unusual son. I kept wondering, if you have a child with special needs, how much of raising them is perparing them for the real world, and how much of it is teaching the real world how to deal with your child and their different way of responding to it?

[Lorraine123]

Yes, these children respond in a way that is normal based on their experiences, but to say that everyone is "normal" is wrong, IMO. A serial killer is acting based on their experiences, but its not normal. A pedophile is reacting based on their past, but it definitely not normal. My daughter's behavior is what would be expected from anyone with her life experiences, however, I would never say it was "normal". If it were normal then it would not be called a "disorder".

[Synesthesia]

I reckon it depends on whether or not the behaviour is harmful, such as self mutilation and things that are worse than that, or whether it's just a minor eccentricity that people have a problem with, like a person that doesn't like getting social or partying.
Folks have trouble making those distinctions at times.

[kate298]

Based on experiences, I don't think hardly anyone can call themselves normal... It comes from a title of a book "EVERYONE SEEMS NORMAL, UNTIL YOU GET TO KNOW THEM" Well and how much fun is normal? Would you rather have a normal family, or an extrarodianary family? As a song says.... Somebody's got to be unafraid, to lead the freak parade! Well I hope I can lead my "freak parade" of a family to just be happy, have fun, and love one another!

[Synesthesia]

I don't feel particularly normal myself.
Especially when it comes to hegemonic feminity.

Though I did get a bit weepy at work over the book Raising Blaze.

[Vogi2002]

I don't think that PEOPLE are normal but I DO believe that some situations could be considered "normal". I also think it's just a term people use, basically saying they are "unhandicapped" or what not. I don't think they mean it as other people who may not be considered "normal" are freaks....they just most of the time mean they are developing mentally and physically at a "standard" rate....KWIM?

[JGarrick]

Originally Posted by cvalda

...one thing that always saddens me a little bit is when people refer to their adopted or foster kids as "not normal".

What is normal, exactly?

I think "normal" includes a pretty wide spectrum of behaviors and personalities, and what seems "not normal" to one person might seem like just a mild quirk to another. I don't think there's so much a line between normal and not normal, as there as a big wide gray area where things become so uncommon that eventually it's fair to say they're not normal. In a sense, the definition of what is normal and what isn't is merely a matter of what a broad cross section of the population considers normal.

While I always advise caution when applying labels to people, I don't object to this one because in most cases the comments about "not normal" kids posted here are helpful comments (or at least intended to be so), and we're an audience of "insiders" that understand the context and the background. They remind us that the behaviors they see are very uncommon, and that typical parenting techniques aren't always effective. In a sense, it's not only the kids that are "not normal," but the parents as well, because they need to use methods that are "not normal" to handle their "not normal" kids.

[Mongoose]

Kelly - I hear you. Honestly it seems to me that a lot of people think that only secure attachment is "normal" and everything else must be corrected.

Also it seems to me that a lot of people will blame everything and anything on their children being adopted and treat it as part of some disorder that needs fixing, whereas if you look at just the fact of the behaviour they're describing and forget that the child is adopted, it looks pretty much like exactly what you'd expect of the child's developmental stage - i.e. it's "normal."

Some people also seem to think it's not "normal" for children to not want to be part of their family. Personally, until children get to pick their families, I find it very "normal" that some kids, adopted or otherwise, will not want the family they're in. And again attachment style comes into play - some people just don't feel the need to have close family bonds and it's not "abnormal."

But as for disorders like ADD etc, I would have to agree with Synesthesia. Whether a child is adopted or in its biological family, when behaviours are such that they interfere with their ability to function mostly the same as the average child, then it's not "normal," even if it is a logical consequence of their history.

[cvalda]

Thanks for all your great responses!

I think I didn't word my thoughts clearly... I agree there is not a set "normal" out there, in my mind... so to say my child (or any child) is "not normal" is implying that there is a norm that they aren't a part of. I find that a bit offensive! It just makes it seem like the child is less of a child for that... and that adoption (or related issues) are to be blamed.

My kids all say we're a weird family! LOL! They say "it's great to be weird! everyone is weird!" I just wouldn't want them to ever feel they are any less a part of the society then any other child without those "issues".

;~) Kelly

[Lorraine123]

that adoption (or related issues) are to be blamed

My daughter has issues that are not "normal" and adoption is to blame. Maybe not adoption specifically, but the circumstances that brought her into adoption. There is huge distinction between being "weird", which we all are, and being "not normal" which we all are not. My family is all weird and crazy, but I have to say that we are still normal. We still love, laugh, have jobs, function in society, etc. My daughter cannot do that. She is not "normal". I get somewhat defensive when everyone says that she is "normal" and should be treated as such. She is severely disordered and is treated accordingly because she needs to be and this a result of her history.