to think that you aren't obliged to form a relationship with a chid you've given up for adoption

[Northernlurker]

Aplohies this is from the Daily Mail but I think it raises some interesting questions.

Susan Jameson has been honest with her daughter about her son's existence, she's given him medical information and told him who his father is but she doesn't want to try and turn back the clock for fifty years and I can understand that. Or does biology oblige one?

(All that aside - selling his story to the Mail is a deeply unclassy thing to do!)

Giving birth to a child does not make you their mother.

In my opinion, in my experience.

What a horrible article with all its talk of "abandoned to follow her acting career" and other woman-blaming language. Surprise surprise from the DM.

It was the 1960s. She might have wanted an abortion but couldn't get one. She gave him up at a time when birth mothers could expect to remain anonymous and uncontacted. She went further than she had to in meeting him at all.

I feel sorry for him, but he seems to have regarded meeting his birth mother as a kind of panacea for everything he is unhappy about. That was always unrealistic.

He's obviously doing the ariticle to get back at her, he wouldnt have made contact if he didnt want more. For the mother, regarding contact i suspect its more complicated. (my mum was adopted and went looking only to find her mother died the year beforehand).

ie. Once contact is made they can be facing telling people in their life who didn't know, possible jealousy from other siblings who didnt know and, find there is not the bond they expected or wanted to feel. Also facing your childs questions as to why you did what you did can make for an uneasy relationship if they dont understand or their adoption hasnt been successful (my mothers adoption was a dismal matter, she was 'bought' from a catholic adoption agency with money her mother's Dr left her under her pillo after her 7th miscarriage).

It is horrible how something that was supposed to be private in 1960 can be splashed all over the papers fifty years later.

ZOMBIE ALERT

This is one reason why my 7 year old adopted child has always had annual direct contact with her birth mother. We meet up for a coffe and chat. There are no secrets. Things were so differant not so many years ago. Adoption was much more secretive and not talked about.
My mother never knew her birth father and even at 82 still wonders about him and any other family she may have. There is a huge hole in her identity. I can't imagine how difficult that must be to deal with.
I haven't read the mail article yet so can't comment on it.

What a selfish lady.

Soontobesix, I regard the son as selfish and spiteful to reveal her name in public.
Thankfully he has not done the same to his birth father. (yet)

Why are we rehashing this 4 years after the article was printed? It seems unfair for everyone concerned.

Didn't see this four years ago. Shameful, how dare the DM splash personal stuff like this. What earthly good did the bloke think it would do?

It's as if he's saying look I've got a famous mum, but I can't benefit from it.

i feel sorry for all .in this story .him because he expected so much .her because she obviuosly did,nt want to deal with that part of her life .we don,t the circumstances of the birth . years ago it was shamefull .to have a child out of wedlock .goodness my grandmother told me in her day girls were put in mental hospitals as sexual deviants .my gran showed me her birth certificate .and it had BASTARD yes BASTARD .on it because her mother had her out of wedlock .she kept her baby but that was unusual then ..why pillar someone now ..he would not have done this if she was not famous .

*i feel for the adoptive family, they accepted a baby as there own, but blood is still thicker than water.

he has a mother, this women is not his mother she just shares his dna*

^^this. Exactly.

Love is not about biology.

gaaaah! that was supposed to go bold!

I thought the poster who posted what tardis quoted meant that she felt sorry for the adoptive family because they'd raised a son of their own but he felt blood was thicker than water.

He doesn't seem to accept his adoptive family as his own - have to admit it made me reconsider looking into adoption as this is my greatest fear.

, those women back when they didn't have any say in the matter and their kids were taken away for adoption is one thing,

its (and I know from 1st hand experience) the ones who were made after a 'whisky bottle on a Saturday night' and then literally discarded as unwanted and unloved. what i took as the 'just shares DNA' bit.

Hope I worded that sensitively.

blood IS thicker than water, but Love transcends all.

Dormouse exactly. a mother and Father are the people that love you, bring you up, nurture you.

a very poor analogy, cant think of a good one,(!) but just cos you didn't plant the flowers you bought at the florist doesn't mean the flowers weren't grown for you to buy, love and have in your home.

what does zombie thread mean?

and Jammies spot on!

I know family - that's sort of why I've thus far avoided it!

But I would be destroyed if a child I'd adopted just considered he didn't fit into 'my' (his) family and was seeking his 'real' ones, I'd be devastated!

Zombie thread means it is a really old thread that has been brought back to life because someone's found it and posted on it.

thanks Genius

Dormouse Ill pm you.

Not read the thread (sorry, am about to cook dinner, don't have time!) but, speaking as an adopted person, I don't think my birth parents have any obligation to me at all. Why would they have? I had 2 perfectly fine parents who raised me, and to want more than 2 would just be plain greedy :) My birth parents did the best they could for me by putting me up for adoption, that was the end of it as I see it.

Unless you were alive at the time, people will ever realise how appalling it was thought to be to have an illegitimate child. You were stigmatised as a loose woman if people found out so it was kept quiet and private if possible. Men? Oh, they just sowed their oats and that was it.

We had a girl at school who was 15 (1957) and she suddenly disappeared from lessons. Ginger Jean, remember? No one ever knew why we never saw her again. Just gossip but it was true, she was pregnant. Shock! Horror!

We were being brought up 'properly and would never go down the route of an illegitimate birth. That's how dreadful it was thought to be.

I still think that marriage should come before babies.......