Five Hard Truths About Adoption Adoptive Parents don't want to Hear

[Kewcumber]

I'm not sure they are "hard" and I'm not sure we don't want to hear them but I do think that they are worth reading and thinking about. I think many of us have already got there but it good to think about them all in one place.

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/louisa-leontiades/five-hard-truths-about-ad_b_6131124.html

And I decided to ignore the "serial killer" fact!

But that fact is a hard truth you don't want to hear Kew! You must look it dead on and face up to it

Interesting/good article, thanks for sharing I agree, it's not "hard" and I do want to hear it, but I'll forgive attention grabbing headlines. I dont think "Thought provoking realities of the authors (and a significant number other adoptees) lived experiences of adoption, which are sometimes (or not as the case may be) difficult for prospective adoptive/adoptive parents to assimilate because it can hit against ones most natural insecurities or hopes"...is really going to cut it in todays media

I wouldn't say they were messages that adoptive parents wouldn't want to hear but it's an interesting article. It's always going to be something to always be aware of isn't it, that need to to accepting, open and honest. It's quite an aggressive title to what is actually a truthful and helpful article though

Agree Raspberry. I didn't look to see who started the thread so I genuinely thought it was a troll when I saw the thread title! I clicked gingerly expecting to read a list eg. 1. You are all evil child snatchers, 2.....etc. Needless to say, I was pleasantly surprised

Yes I thought the title was actually a shame because the issues are thoughtful and an interesting read. Of course it is written for the American market. I wonder if I could anglicise it and shamelessly pinch it for my blog which has been shamelessly neglected during tonsillitis season

Yes, I too found the article interesting and found nothing to disagree with - except for the unnecessarily antagonistic tone of the heading and some of the text. It kind of sat uneasily between between a personal telling of her own life - in which the antagonism may well be valid - and an article that claims to be about ALL adoptive parents (in which case I would have liked a little more evidence).

Anyway, I can live with that. I think reading articles like this should be part of adoption prep. Even when they're hard to read, they're really useful.

Gwan, Kew, write your own. I particularly liked the bit about adopters trotting out the 'chosen' line whereas most of us actually only chose a category/abstract idea/social worker's brief assessment of a child, and that pretty much any child who fitted that category would have done. I'm not sure it's helpful, anyway, to tell children they were specially chosen - it seems to me highly likely to make them feel burdened by expectations - I just keep to saying how much I wanted another baby and how amazingly thrilled and lucky we were to get her.

I exceptionally rarely use the chosen line Devora. Because well as the author points out he wasn't really at least not by me!

I have in a pinch when was getting teased at school about it said to him "Look at it this way DS, I could at many points have said No thanks I'd like to see another child and I didn't but their parents really were stuck with them"

I almost felt bad about it but I was feeling a little cross at the time with the little beggars.

DS has actually asked me (yesterday I think) why I say I was so lucky to get him. I said that it was because my life was so much better with him than without him.

As an adoptee I found the sweeping generalisations very irritating . Adoptees are not a homogenous group any more than " all women " or " all lesbians " .

If the author has presented it as their own experience it woudl have been more reasonable , rather than insisting rather stridently that they are speaking for all adoptees . And if you don't agreee, then it's because " you don't want to hear " .

No actually I don't agree because a lot of what you say about " all adoptees " isn't true for me at all. Does this mean I'm a freak ? Or not " real " ?

Why is the author telling me that I'm living under and assumed name ? Why would a name I had as a tiny baby be " real " but a name ive used for over 50 years be " assumed " ?

I can only assume the author is very young , perhaps teens or twenties . If not , they need some therapy as IM not very HO they have a lot of issues.

Ha, I have googled her. I see she is a journalist who makes a living from having very controversial and provocative opinions .

I wonder what her children think about having the details of their parents sex life discussed on the www. Ours make " ugh " noises if they see us kiss. Must be different in Sweden

KristinaM, I'm neither an adoptee nor an adoptive parent, but I read the article out of general interest and thought the author seemed shockingly self-absorbed and ungrateful.

I assume the vast majority of adoptive parents are doing the same as most biological parents - muddling along doing their best! - but the author seems to be holding them to an impossibly high standard.

Thanks for posting this article, Kew. Very interesting and thought provoking. Some bits I totally disagreed with, some makes an awful lot of sense.
Also agree that I don't find it hard to read......it is exactly what I WANT to read to help me understand and be more understanding with DD4.

Thats interesting Kristina - I think I glazed over the bits I didn't agree with! Like the assumed name thing.

I think it would be far better to have written it as a "things that I found that you should consider" though I agree thats not exactly attention grabbing.

I think for me the idea of having two mothers (and possibly two fathers) is a good one for prospective adopters to get their head around rather than getting too hung up on always labelling them as only "birth" parents as for very many children thats not true.

If you googled enough to find the story of the reunion with her father you will discover that she does indeed need a whole pile of therapy (IMVHO)

And I agree that I don't expect my child to be grateful for a competent parent that every other child expected as their right.

I expect him to be grateful not to get a clip across the back of his head when he's cheeky but no more than that.

And to be fair we don't really know how competent her adoptive parents were - just being an adopter doesn;t actually make you a more thoughtful parent.

Interesting that 'birth mother' is seen as derogatory. I have thought about using 'first mum' instead but I worry that will just get confusing - because she has two adoptive mums - and I worry she'll get the idea that mums coms and go. Maybe I would feel differently if she had actually known her mum, or indeed if she had ever been mothered by her. Mostly I just call her by her name, and I guess as dd gets older she will develop her own preferences on what to call her, which I can't imagine I won't go along with.