Post by Robin HarrittPost by mikeOne thing that disturbs me in the adoption "field"is the concensus that
somehow adoption is wrong. That it doesnt matter about the welfare of
the child and adoption is just giving "barren" women the chance to have
a child. Even if that was the sole criteria for adoptiion whats wrong
with it? Surely to give a child a stable home even if its not withthe
natural parent is more important than fulfilling a biological need.
Mike
I agree with most of that Mike, but I do hope in this day and age that is
never the "sole criteria" and that any prospective adoptive parents
understand the special needs of any adopted child and the specific needs of
the child they intend to adopt.
I hope that adoption is used sparingly and only for children who genuinely
need adopting. I would not want to see a return to the mass adoption of the
1950s, 60s and early 70s. However even in those days I'd rather have been
adopted than grow up in a children's home.
I'm a bit late to this party but it happens that I did part of my growing up
in a children's home and part as an adoptee.
Nazareth House was wholly disastrous, and its awfulness has been amply
covered elsewhere and by people other than me.
The adoption was only 50% disastrous in the sense that my adoptive father
was about as close to a saint as an ordinary mortal can get, and my adoptive
mother was a sad, cruel, vicious, evil, bitch.
And therein lies the lesson. It is as ridiculous to be anti-adoption as it
is to pretend that adoption is all sweetness and light. It depends entirely
on the particular individuals concerned, on their relationships, and on
their circumstances. Every case is different. The process itself is neither
right nor wrong.
There is ne common factor in all adoptions, and that is the actual or
potential loss of important genetic information about liability to disease.
Information which people growing up in birthfamilies absorb almost without
knowing they are learning it. When that information does not get across the
adoption barrier there can be serious consequences for the health of the
adoptee (and of their natural descendants).
The social model of adoption, which is in effect that genetics do not matter
but parenting activities do matter in bringing up a child, was nonsense when
it was first propounded. It remained nonsense all through its espousal by
asocial workers, and it will forever be nonsense. The brutal truth is that
whether an adoption is individually good, bad or indefferent will make
absolutely no difference whatever to what genes exist in every cell of the
adoptee's body. If those genes code for diabetes, as they do in my case,
then I will get diabetes sooner or later whatever my adoptive parents are or
do. The same is true of every genetic disease.
Knowing one's liability allows rational decisions on lifestyle, planning
whether to have kids of one's own, and many other matters. Not knowing puts
oneself and one's own kids at unnecessary risk.
Nature and nurture are not neatly divisible as the above might suggest. For
an example, my adoptive father was a fitness fanatic, like 'explosive' and
sprinting activities, and was always disappointed when I did not join in or
performed appallingly badly if I did. Then long-distance swimming and other
endurance activities came into the frame. So long as I went at it slowly I
could grind Dad or anybody else into the dust. I could swim on and on and on
for 12 hours or more in water so cold that hypothermia should have killed me
in 15 minutes. Dad couldn't understand it, and neither did I at the time.
Had we known the diabetic history in my birthfamily, we could have explained
it easily and made lifestyle changes which would mean that I would have had
a lot longer before fatal complications set in. I was exhibiting one classic
form of the pre-diabetic metabolism. I wsn't storing and burning glucose,
which is a fast process, but storing and burning fat, which is slow. My
collapsing after a short sprint was a form of diabetic hypo. But we didn't
know, and the GP couldn't have been alerted because we didn't know the
diabetic history in the birthfamily.
Although I have quoted my own case it isn't a personal story. It applies to
every adoptee with any form of genetic disease inheritance.
Yes, adoptees are just like all other kids. They want 'nice' parenting not
'nasty' parenting. Sometimes they get it and sometimes they don't. But there
is a real 'fault' in almost all adoptions, and it is the separation of the
child from health information about its birthfamily. And that separation
kills people.
Don