Domestic Adoption Baby
Boom - Exploiting Women and Families in America by
Laurie Frisch
The announcement of a domestic adoption "baby boom"
has undoubtedly brought hope to people wanting to adopt
an infant. But this announcement begs the question: Where
are these babies coming from? Is there a systemic issue
to be addressed?
Marion, IA (PRWEB) June 9, 2004 -- The recent headlines
must give hope to people who want to adopt a baby: "Local
adoption agency has rare openings" and "Catholic
Charities expands its adoption program". The first
article describes a domestic adoption "baby boom";
the second article announces an expansion in a domestic
adoption program. But by announcing domestic adoption "baby
booms" these agencies might as well be announcing their
role in the exploitation of United States citizens.
Not only do mothers who lose children to adoption have
life-long problems so severe that some commit suicide as
a result, but there is also a higher rate of suicide, childlessness,
divorce, alcoholism, and other addictions among adoptees
than the norm in society.
Those who profit from adoption blame the adoptees' problems
on genetics. If genetics is the cause, the collection of
statistical data might clear up any doubt. In the many cases
where mothers married their adopted-out child's father and
had other children, it could be determined what percentage
of the kept children experienced the same problems as the
adopted-out ones.
According to statistics compiled on adoption.com the mothers
who lose babies to adoption "often come from higher
socioeconomic backgrounds. These women come from intact
families." (Stolley, 1993) These mothers and their
families are more likely to be naïve than to be genetically
defective. Told "everyone benefits" from adoption
and in the absence of any real information, they may think
it's true. In poorer families, younger "adoptable"
children and babies are systematically taken under the guise
of child protection. The poverty frequently follows divorce
or is related to medical problems of some family member.
Most of the mothers have jobs. And although the people who
know these moms may see a caring, wonderful, competent individual
from the perspective of the government they are only a source
of babies for adoption.
The fact that adoptees and natural mothers frequently have
serious problems due to separation is well known to experts.
In a paper entitled "CHALLENGING THE SILENCE OF THE
MENTAL HEALTH COMMUNITY ON ADOPTION ISSUES" published
in the Journal of Social Distress and the Homeless, Vol.
II, No. 2. April 2002, Douglas B. Henderson (University
of Wisconsin, Professor Emeritus, Department of Psychology)
discusses some of the reasons for the experts silence on
the issue: Professionals not wanting to admit to failure,
the money to be made in adoption, and an unwillingness on
the part of adoptees to appear ungrateful to their adopters
are a few.
He explains the techniques used by the National Council
For Adoption, which represents the agencies that profit
from adoption, to silence others: "...the NCFA has
attempted to marginalize and pathologize anyone who reports
that adoption experiences are problematic. Setting themselves
up as the national experts on adoption, while actually representing
not the adoptees and (natural) parents who have lived adoption
but rather the agencies making money on adoptions, the NCFA
has long accused anyone who criticized adoption practices
as being 'antiadoption.'"
With all that is known by experts about the ill effects
of separating family and of the secrecy in adoption, it
remains that adoption is a very lucrative business. Thanks
to lobbying efforts we now have government funding for Infant
Adoption Awareness training, maternity homes, adoption counseling,
subsidies and other aid for adopters, and so-called "safe
havens" where a frightened mother unsure of how to
get real help may leave her newborn son or daughter. In
some states there are adoption aid "Choose Life"
license plates, with proceeds going toward advertising and
adoption services.
Those in the health professions can become an "Adoption
Specialist" after a free three-day training program.
There is no requirement that this training inform trainees
of the life-long emotional consequences of surrender/adoption
to mother, child or other family members.
By implementing the Adoption University@ curriculum in
schools both mother and father may be influenced to "choose"
adoption before they are even expecting. All risks are hidden
and the implementation of this training in a group setting
makes it possible for an opposing viewpoint to be squelched
by the group.
The joy and pride of parents and grandparents who have
maintained hope, worked through their issues and kept their
children is very evident. But with all the adoption training
now implemented, a pregnant mother is likely to encounter
teachers, doctors, nurses, counselors and others who will
not mention the joys of motherhood, but instead will pressure
her to surrender all parental rights and will speak of surrender
in glowing terms to her parents as well. Her baby's father
is unlikely to support her when adoption has been presented
as "better" than taking responsibility for his
own child.
A young pregnant mother or her parents may be lured by
a "dorm" with "park-like setting", "beautiful
swimming pool" and "cozy fireplace". Separated
from family and society to aid in "decision-making"
and repeatedly hearing "It's your choice" the
mothers will leave this maternity home still bleeding from
childbirth saying "It was my choice". With their
thoughts constrained by the carefully chosen phrases provided
by the adoption industry, it'll be years before they comprehend
that in the their best interest and the best interest of
their child the risks of adoption should have been disclosed
and the choice to keep children they give birth to should
have been promoted.
Other coercive tactics used to obtain babies include having
prospective adopters chosen in advance and even present
at the birth (and we wouldn't want to disappoint them, would
we?).
The cruelest tactic used to obtain a baby is the use of
the open adoption "carrot", the promise to a mother
or family of continuing contact with their child. Many parents
don't know that the adoption may be closed at any time without
their consent. Frequently, the adoption is closed immediately;
the promise of openness made only to lure them in. For the
natural family, it's devastating.
From the industry standpoint, open adoption has a clear
advantage: Mothers whose children were adopted-out know
that for speaking out honestly about the effects of adoption
on themselves, their child and the rest of their family,
the "punishment" will be cutting off all contact
with their child. So, as they see their adopted-out children
cared for by nannies, treated harshly by male adopters who
didn't really want them in the first place, denied access
to their siblings or experiencing other problems these mothers
keep quiet or even continue to promote adoption. They may
have to convince themselves it is "better" or
was "meant to be" just to cope.
The intense solicitation to obtain babies now includes
offers to pay "expenses" far beyond pregnancy-related
costs. These "expenses" include scholarships,
car payments, entertainment, house maintenance, credit card
payments and personal loans. How does this compare to soliciting
to buy children from families off the streets in Cambodia?
THAT is considered criminal! After accepting this aid, a
mother may be coerced by agencies or lawyers using the lie
that she will have to pay all expenses back if she decides
to keep her child. Not surprisingly, there is adopters insurance
to protect the adopters.
New tactics to obtain babies are being developed all the
time. Even whole nuclear families may be advised that it
is "best" to surrender their new baby if a parent
has been laid off temporarily.
In his paper, Douglas B. Henderson concludes: "It
is time for the silence of the mental health professions
on issues related to adoption to end…. Continuing the
silence will serve the interests of no one, and will lead
to further difficulties for all those touched by the adoption
process."
A domestic adoption "baby boom" should not be
a source of pride, but of shame on the part of agencies,
medical experts, the government and others for having exploited
citizens of our own country, the United States, to obtain
babies.
