There's a very good discussion going on over at Feministe about adoption and the rights of children to be raised by their biological parents, the rights of mothers to raise their children, rights regarding creating families and raising other people's children, what's problematic in the adoption world and what can be done about it. There are many comments coming from a variety of POV in the constellation.
I think it's worth reading if you have a few minutes....
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Saturday, July 9, 2011
Did I make reparation yet?
adj.
1. Against the law; illegal.
2. Born out of wedlock.
3. Grammar Not in correct usage.
4. Incorrectly deduced; illogical.
5. Biology Unacceptable as a scientific name because of contradiction to the international rules of nomenclature.
I have been fighting this word for years. I hate it! I hate it when it's used in reference to human beings. To me it's demeaning and humiliating. It's completely unnecessary. The dictionary definition may not seem that way, it's just a word. It's just a meaning for a word. That's true but words have power. They affect people in good ways and in bad.
Today a friend of mine posted a link to a site I've seen before but I hadn't seen this particular page before. As I read I could feel my blood pressure building, my teeth grinding and the bile rising in the back of my throat. Just like the definition of that word, people like this priest have power. People listen to what he has to say. They put stock in the answers he has to offer and what he writes on websites like this. He's a representative of a church that I used to belong to, a church that participated in the taking of my child. If you read the page on this link you'll see that in the church's tradition....
"The Catholic Church does not look down on such a woman or expect her to bear the mark of her guilt upon her person, like a cursed woman. But, at the same time, the Church does not deny that the woman must still bear the consequences of her action after Confession, even if she made a perfect Act of Contrition, and would thereby be worthy to enter Heaven in she should die that very moment.
The social situation of the mother and child does not change after Confession and the completed penance; and yes, no matter who has argued to the contrary since I first broached the subject over a year ago, it is an ongoing scandal. Until her situation as a “single mother” changes, it is not advisable the woman should be included in all the normal social life at the parish, e.g. youth groups, etc. An unwed mother can get support from certain more mature members of the parish for her spiritual and temporal needs without appearing ostentatiously for the confusion, and, yes, the scandal of the little ones.
Fr. Jacques Leclercq, Professor at the Saint Louis Institute of Brussels, author ofLessons of Natural Law, indirectly confirms this opinion when he states:
“To admit the illegitimate children in the family, and to put them at the same situation of the legitimate ones, would be to ruin the fundamental institution of the marriage, because the same familial advantages would be obtained without the family by means of illegitimate unions” (1).
What is valid for the family life, proportionally is also valid with regard to Catholic social life in the parish and elsewhere."
The social situation of the mother and child does not change after Confession and the completed penance; and yes, no matter who has argued to the contrary since I first broached the subject over a year ago, it is an ongoing scandal. Until her situation as a “single mother” changes, it is not advisable the woman should be included in all the normal social life at the parish, e.g. youth groups, etc. An unwed mother can get support from certain more mature members of the parish for her spiritual and temporal needs without appearing ostentatiously for the confusion, and, yes, the scandal of the little ones.
Fr. Jacques Leclercq, Professor at the Saint Louis Institute of Brussels, author ofLessons of Natural Law, indirectly confirms this opinion when he states:
“To admit the illegitimate children in the family, and to put them at the same situation of the legitimate ones, would be to ruin the fundamental institution of the marriage, because the same familial advantages would be obtained without the family by means of illegitimate unions” (1).
What is valid for the family life, proportionally is also valid with regard to Catholic social life in the parish and elsewhere."
So..... the unwed mother is not looked down upon by the church but she is to be ostracized from it. Seems to me the church is speaking out of both sides of it's mouth. We care for our parishioners but don't you dare have sex outside marriage. Well, we all know that sex outside marriage is going to happen because we're human BUT if you get caught by growing another human inside you (because that's really the only way anyone is going to know that you had sex outside of marriage isn't it?) you can't come to any of our meetings anymore. AND, if your children are to associate with legitimate children the institution of marriage will be destroyed. We can't have these associations so here we have the solutions....
Catholic solutions
"The presupposition of the three solutions below is that the mother has full right over her child, as has the father. They also have the duty to raise their child well. In principle, they should marry, if the father is still single. But, as almost always happens, the father is either unknown because of the promiscuous life of the mother, or is known but has fled his responsibilities. So, let us face the common case of a single mother alone with her child.
What are the solutions for such a scandalous situation?
The first is marriage. If the woman finds another man of upright character who marries her in the Church and takes her and the child under his custody, her situation is regularized. He covers her shame with his honor and his name."
"The presupposition of the three solutions below is that the mother has full right over her child, as has the father. They also have the duty to raise their child well. In principle, they should marry, if the father is still single. But, as almost always happens, the father is either unknown because of the promiscuous life of the mother, or is known but has fled his responsibilities. So, let us face the common case of a single mother alone with her child.
What are the solutions for such a scandalous situation?
The first is marriage. If the woman finds another man of upright character who marries her in the Church and takes her and the child under his custody, her situation is regularized. He covers her shame with his honor and his name."
I don't know why.... why am I still surprised by these attitudes - "almost always" the mother is a slut and the father is a deadbeat. So the solution - find another guy to put a ring on her finger because we all know that that is the be all end all of existence. That child will not be a legitimate human being unless there's a ring, a band of metal formed into a circular shape and pushed onto the ring finger of the left hand. Now her situation can be regularized. What the hell does that mean - be regularized? I guess it fits right in with my so-called status as a BM.
Oh, and let's not forget - he covers her shame with his honor. So because he was willing to say "I Do" her shame is no more. When, oh when will these attitudes go away?! Isn't it about time we recognized each other's worth as human beings and love each other simply because we are, not because we say a certain collection of words or wear a piece of metal around a digit. When is the human race going to outgrow this nonsense? If we are to really follow the lessons of natural law then we will love each other unconditionally. We will accept and love new life without labels and insults. We will care for each other without casting members of the race aside simply for being human.
From the same page....
"Adoption is also a possibility for such a situation, provided that the unwed mother is at least reasonably certain that the foster parents will raise the child in the Catholic Faith. The role of the godparents, usually in practice more of a background role, clearly becomes more active and they are required to help the mother fulfill her responsibilities in such a situation. It may even be the case that one or both of the godparents (if they are married, which is often the case) would be in a situation to become the foster parents. That would be ideal.
An important point to remember in these last solutions is that the unwed mother has to overcome her natural affection for her child in order to give the best chance to save his soul.
This separation imposed by charity will go a long way in helping the unwed mother to make reparation for her sin, assuming, of course, that she did sin, and was not violated without her fault."
An important point to remember in these last solutions is that the unwed mother has to overcome her natural affection for her child in order to give the best chance to save his soul.
This separation imposed by charity will go a long way in helping the unwed mother to make reparation for her sin, assuming, of course, that she did sin, and was not violated without her fault."
Well, that was obviously written by someone who has never had children. Apparently the only way I was to save my daughter's soul was to overcome my affection for her. Separating a newborn infant from her mother will cleanse the mother of her sin and save the child's soul. No thought is given to what the separation does to the child or the mother, the lifelong grief that results. This is written by a man. A man who has no idea what it is to carry life within. What it is to give birth. A man who cannot marry and have children of his own. A man who has no idea what it is to raise and love a family. How dare he?! How dare he put these rules out there. Rules about life and love that he knows nothing about. Who is he to decide what is sinful? Who is this church to decide who is to be accepted and who is not? Who is he to tear mother from child?
I'm so tired of hearing this attitude of moral authority from an institution who hides criminals and has a history of abuse in so many parts of the world. I'm going with number 4 of the definitions of illegitimate: the CHURCH is "incorrectly deduced; illogical"
Thursday, June 16, 2011
Now I remember.....
There was a reason I stopped watching Dr. Phil years ago. I was reminded of it again last night when I watched a rerun of an episode about a 16 year old girl who was pregnant and trying to make up her mind about what to do. This girl had a home, 2 parents who love her and were willing to support whatever decision she made and her boyfriend who was supposedly involved in the decision making process. It appeared that her mother was having a difficult time with the idea of letting her grandchild go - understandably.
Now Dr. Phil's idea of helping - have the girl meet with the people at Catholic Charities, have her meet an adoption attorney who wants to set her up with a counselor - gosh, no conflict of interest there. Here's the doozy - have her meet a woman who tried to adopt a newborn 5 times and the mothers all changed their minds after the births. What do you think is going through the mind of a 16 yr old pregnant girl as she watches a woman cry because of 5 "failed adoptions". Now the girl doesn't want to see a counselor because she and the PAP are best buds and she doesn't think she needs counseling.
Dr. Phil throws in one more helper. An adoptee who thought open adoption would be a bad idea because it would be too confusing for the child. The child only needs one set of parents and should be allowed to only bond with them. So where was the natural mother talking about the consequences of losing a child to adoption? Where was the counselor or psychiatrist discussing the lifelong pain and grief that natural mothers can suffer or the pain of adoptees who long for a connection with their natural families? Where was the discussion about the feeling of abandonment many adoptees live with? Where was the discussion of the lack of legal protection for the natural mother in regards to open adoption?
This young girl was only 6 1/2 months along, was being told that she's not responsible enough to deal with a baby and being presented with the usual one-sided, "adoption is the best option" BS and then pressured to make a decision. So of course at the end of the show she announces her decision to choose adoption. What a surprise. And people say coercion doesn't happen anymore - more BS.
Now Dr. Phil's idea of helping - have the girl meet with the people at Catholic Charities, have her meet an adoption attorney who wants to set her up with a counselor - gosh, no conflict of interest there. Here's the doozy - have her meet a woman who tried to adopt a newborn 5 times and the mothers all changed their minds after the births. What do you think is going through the mind of a 16 yr old pregnant girl as she watches a woman cry because of 5 "failed adoptions". Now the girl doesn't want to see a counselor because she and the PAP are best buds and she doesn't think she needs counseling.
Dr. Phil throws in one more helper. An adoptee who thought open adoption would be a bad idea because it would be too confusing for the child. The child only needs one set of parents and should be allowed to only bond with them. So where was the natural mother talking about the consequences of losing a child to adoption? Where was the counselor or psychiatrist discussing the lifelong pain and grief that natural mothers can suffer or the pain of adoptees who long for a connection with their natural families? Where was the discussion about the feeling of abandonment many adoptees live with? Where was the discussion of the lack of legal protection for the natural mother in regards to open adoption?
This young girl was only 6 1/2 months along, was being told that she's not responsible enough to deal with a baby and being presented with the usual one-sided, "adoption is the best option" BS and then pressured to make a decision. So of course at the end of the show she announces her decision to choose adoption. What a surprise. And people say coercion doesn't happen anymore - more BS.
Tuesday, June 7, 2011
Many articles
Lots of information here, many articles to read so I thought I'd just post the link and you can go through the list.
http://canadianbanishedmother.wordpress.com/2011/06/07/international-adoption-facts/
Thanks for sharing Susie
http://canadianbanishedmother.wordpress.com/2011/06/07/international-adoption-facts/
Thanks for sharing Susie
Saturday, June 4, 2011
Things that I'm pondering
In art there is such a thing as a value scale. Here value refers to the relative lightness or darkness of a color. On some value scales there is a numeric value placed on the scale with 0 representing the darkest value and 10 representing the lightest value - white. I never thought I would see a correlation between the value scale in art and the value of children in adoption. There's a value scale in adoption? You betcha.
from page 44...
"The Caucasian single mother was expected to pay for violating norms against premarital sex and conception. Her pregnancy, according to experts, was a neurotic symptom. Experts also agreed that only the most seriously disturbed unwed mothers kept their babies rather than giving them up to middle-class Caucasian couples for adoption (Solinger, 1992). While 90 percent of African American single mothers kept their babies between 1945 and 1965, over 90 percent of Caucasian unwed mothers in maternity homes relinquished their babies for adoption. The view that giving up her infant for adoption was the only path to psychological redemption for the Caucasian single mother was promoted by officials and professionals employed by the United States Children's Bureau, Florence Crittenton Association of America, the Salvation Army, and Catholic Charities, as well as by psychologists, psychiatrists, and clergy.
The social mandate of giving up children for adoption paralleled an increase of infertility among Caucasian couples of childbearing age and an increased demand for adoptable healthy, Caucasian infants (Zelizer, 1985; Silber & Speedlin, 1983). At the same time, African American women received the mandate to keep and raise their illegitimate children, a mandate so strong that an African American unwed mother who tried to give her baby up for adoption could be charged with desertion. In a paper presented at the National Conference on Social Welfare in 1953, Caucasian, unmarried mothers were referred to as "breeding machines, a means to an end. As individuals... they are overlooked, and popular support tends to concentrate upon securing babies for quick adoptions" (Solinger, 1992, p. 28)."
Here she quotes Rickie Solinger again...
"[Black unwed mothers] were viewed as socially unproductive breeders, constrainable only by punitive, legal sanctions. Proponents of school segregation, restrictive public housing, exclusionary welfare policies, and enforced sterilization or birth control all used the issue of relatively high rates of Black illegitimacy to support their campaigns. White unwed mothers in contrast were viewed as socially productive breeders whose babies, unfortunately conceived out of wedlock, could offer infertile couples their only chance to construct proper families. (1992, p. 24)"
So what it boils down to is, the "product" of an African American woman's womb is not as valuable as the "product" of a White woman's womb and the means of control used on each woman was different based on her skin color. The way I was treated in 1979/80 was no different than the treatment of girls in the BSE. The BSE did not abruptly end in 1972. It gradually tapered off and it took many years for that to happen. That has me wondering about some things. Being of Latin descent, was I treated differently than other unwed pregnant women? Did my daughter's adoptive parents pay a lesser fee for her adoption? If they did pay a lesser fee, did they pay it because of the fact that the adoption was handled through Catholic Social Services or because of my heritage? Or both? Then throw this in the mix - I found out 6 years after losing my daughter that I was also an adoptee - although a half-adoptee/step-parent adoptee/adoptee-lite - whatever you want to call me. Upon finding out about my adoption I found that instead of being Puerto Rican/Cuban, I'm Puerto Rican/Irish! My natural father was blond and blue-eyed, the ideal adoptable combo and my daughter's father is also blue eyed and fair. Her Latin side suddenly got watered down a bit more. So, what does that mean? Does it mean that had my daughter's real heritage been known by the agency there would've been a different price attached to her? Where do I fall on the value scale - 6 or 7? Where does my daughter fall - 8 or 9 maybe?
Disgusting.
One more minor ponder... why is it that spell check doesn't recognize the word 'adoptee'?
Monday, May 23, 2011
Transitions
Wow, it's been a while since I've posted here. Life just has a way of getting in the way of things that I'd like to do. Actually I should say jobs have a way of getting in the way. Sometimes we just have to realize that there's only so many hours in the day. If I could figure out a way to skip the whole sleeping thing I would but since I'm not a bot I have to deal with it.
For the past couple of months I've been dealing with the end of an 18 year job and the beginning of a new adventure. The transition required that I work both at the same time and that's been incredibly difficult. The end of the job was a good (and scary) thing. I had been burned out to the degree where I had to talk myself into getting out of the car every morning when I got to the parking lot. I had to repeat positive, self-healing mantras on the drive to work each day while fighting back the tears just knowing I had to go there (if that isn't a sign that you're burned out I don't know what is). While doing that, I also began another venture with my painting partner. We've been teaching art classes together for years, we wrote a book together but now we're taking it to another level with our own studio location. So while handling the closing sales of the store and end of the job I was trying to get the new situation started. There's a lot to do to get up and running!
How do you deal with the end of a job and the expansion of a true calling while at the same time wanting to do research, write blogs, write to legislators, work on boards, paint paintings in the adoption series, see family, visit the kids, babysit the grandbaby, oh yeah - I am still married so seeing him occasionally would be nice too.
So, what's the point of all this whining? Just letting you know that I'm still here. There are certain people who can get me fired up, get back in the saddle and wanting to spread the word and they are Amanda and Robin, two of the strongest voices for adoption reform I know.
I may not be able to post as often as I'd like but I'm still reading, I'm still listening, I'm still here. Let's take the money out of adoption! Let's preserve families.
I may not be able to post as often as I'd like but I'm still reading, I'm still listening, I'm still here. Let's take the money out of adoption! Let's preserve families.
Saturday, April 23, 2011
Easter weekend
It was Easter weekend when I met my daughter for the very first time. I remember flying in to Columbus OH airport, (not a very long flight from FL although it felt like an eternity) and getting off the plane. No one was at the gate to greet me so I headed to the baggage claim area. I think I hyperventilated all the way down there. At one point going down the stairs I thought I would faint. My breathing was labored, my pulse rapid, I had to stop and lean against the wall to try and catch my breath, all I could think was - I'm about to meet my daughter! It was only 22 years in the making and the year that we met was also her birthday weekend.
I didn't know what to think. I know what I was feeling - pure terror! I wasn't afraid of her - I was afraid of all the emotion that the reunion was going to bring up. I was afraid I would be a blubbering idiot in front of all these people - all these people being her adoptive family. What would they think of me? What would she think of me? I figured some of them would be at the airport to support her and that was fine and dandy. I'm the one who made the decision to go alone for the reunion so I had no one there holding me up. It was my own fault. For some reason I felt like I had to do this on my own. I was alone throughout the pregnancy, I was alone when I gave birth, I was alone when I signed the papers and I needed to be alone to meet her. It was between me and her. There was one thing that she and I shared - and no one else - and that's her birth. No one else can lay claim to it. Her adoptive family could sing happy birthday to her but it was me who was there. It was me feeling the labor pain. She arrived in this world through me. No matter what else happened it was me and her.
So since that reunion it's been me and her figuring things out, getting to know each other and feeling our way through the labyrinth that is reunion. We took things slowly and it was worth it. We've been remembering our connection and learning how to navigate it. She's learned I'm 'momma' and I rejoiced the day I heard her say that word. I remember crying with joy the first time she called me that. There's just no describing what it feels like to hear your daughter call you a term of endearment for the first time ever, decades after giving birth. It's a tricky thing to feel like someones mother yet at the same time be on the outside looking in. It's a weird place to be. How far do you go with the 'mom' thing. She has another mother, the one who was there when she was growing up. I wanted to be the one who was there but wasn't allowed to be. It took a long time to figure out how to fit in now that she is grown up. I think we got it figured out though. It was hesitant at first, became a friendship over time and then it grew and filled in the spaces that make up 'mom and daughter'.
Because her birthday is so close to Easter, this holiday used to bring with it a grieving. While I was having fun watching my other 2 children hunt eggs there was a sadness that sat just below the surface. I didn't dare think about it. That got completely turned around in that spring 9 years ago as I sat next to her, shoulders touching, on a bench in Ohio, watching my grandchildren play in the yard. Easter once again became a time for new life and this year I get to celebrate another new life with my granddaughter's first Easter.
Life is good with all my children and grandchildren in it. Happy Easter Liz, Aaron, Sarah, Josh, Kory, Jakob and now Maxine. xoxoxoxoxo
I didn't know what to think. I know what I was feeling - pure terror! I wasn't afraid of her - I was afraid of all the emotion that the reunion was going to bring up. I was afraid I would be a blubbering idiot in front of all these people - all these people being her adoptive family. What would they think of me? What would she think of me? I figured some of them would be at the airport to support her and that was fine and dandy. I'm the one who made the decision to go alone for the reunion so I had no one there holding me up. It was my own fault. For some reason I felt like I had to do this on my own. I was alone throughout the pregnancy, I was alone when I gave birth, I was alone when I signed the papers and I needed to be alone to meet her. It was between me and her. There was one thing that she and I shared - and no one else - and that's her birth. No one else can lay claim to it. Her adoptive family could sing happy birthday to her but it was me who was there. It was me feeling the labor pain. She arrived in this world through me. No matter what else happened it was me and her.
So since that reunion it's been me and her figuring things out, getting to know each other and feeling our way through the labyrinth that is reunion. We took things slowly and it was worth it. We've been remembering our connection and learning how to navigate it. She's learned I'm 'momma' and I rejoiced the day I heard her say that word. I remember crying with joy the first time she called me that. There's just no describing what it feels like to hear your daughter call you a term of endearment for the first time ever, decades after giving birth. It's a tricky thing to feel like someones mother yet at the same time be on the outside looking in. It's a weird place to be. How far do you go with the 'mom' thing. She has another mother, the one who was there when she was growing up. I wanted to be the one who was there but wasn't allowed to be. It took a long time to figure out how to fit in now that she is grown up. I think we got it figured out though. It was hesitant at first, became a friendship over time and then it grew and filled in the spaces that make up 'mom and daughter'.
Because her birthday is so close to Easter, this holiday used to bring with it a grieving. While I was having fun watching my other 2 children hunt eggs there was a sadness that sat just below the surface. I didn't dare think about it. That got completely turned around in that spring 9 years ago as I sat next to her, shoulders touching, on a bench in Ohio, watching my grandchildren play in the yard. Easter once again became a time for new life and this year I get to celebrate another new life with my granddaughter's first Easter.
Life is good with all my children and grandchildren in it. Happy Easter Liz, Aaron, Sarah, Josh, Kory, Jakob and now Maxine. xoxoxoxoxo
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)