Been reading around blogs this morning and found much that nauseated me. Thankfully I found a few gems as well. I decided to pinch one anonymous comment I found especially interesting and share it here with you.
Nobody can be an expert on the background to every single adoption program in the world unless that's what you do all day and get paid for it. I also disagree that there's plenty of information for people to take away from the blogs; there's a lot of bickering and name calling, but little useful info. Better to do your own research and try to find out why children are institutionalized in the country where you adopted from/plan to adopt from and what you can do to enable family preservation in that country. Every adoptive parent(has)an obligation to do this IMO. But if you adopted from Eastern Europe, don't try to be an expert on China (the roots of child institutionalization in EE will keep you occupied for months or years) and don't pretend that you're an expert on all intercountry adoptees or adoption just because you were adopted in Wisconsin in 1966. There are a handful of dedicated people doing the legwork to rid the system of corruption in different regions. Find those people and those lists (mostly closed), find the research that explains WHY children and families are separated, and support the foundations that do the work, including driving some trial programs with group homes and fostering—even in places where foster parenting is not the norm. EveryChild is an example of one that does this in EE, since a couple of people mentioned that example.
You can find a link to their report here:
http://p-ced.com/reference/Family_Matters_summary.pdf
They view intercountry adoption as a very last resort but have nothing good to say about institutionalization. As usual, reality isn't on one side or the other.
Sunday
15 comments:
Feel free to flag your comment PRIVATE. I realize commenting can be intimidating so if you have something to say to me you'd rather not have published you're welcome to do so, just make sure you let me know it's private. If you want a reply, leave your email address.
I'm also completely fine with good anonymous comments. I've seen some great ones!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Who needs to be an expert on that?? Better to try to understand adoption, the process, the life and what to do to prevent it surely?
ReplyDelete@ Von: Because adoption in China isn't the same as adoption in Ukraine? Or adoption in Guatemala? or Vietnam? etc.
ReplyDeleteRight, Mei Ling. International adoption is not monolithic and differs from country to country. If your goal is to clean up corruption and/or to help children in care, you do have to be an expert in the country you are focusing on. Some adult adoptees, Koreans in particular, and some adoptive parents have done this and are doing good work.
ReplyDeleteBut if your goal is just to eliminate adoption everywhere, with no real concern for children in orphanages and other care situations except that they never be adopted, no, you do not have to know anything at all. You can just self-righteously proclaim that as a domestic adoptee you know all there is to know and that's that.
"Find those people and those lists (mostly closed), find the research that explains WHY children and families are separated, and support the foundations that do the work, including driving some trial programs with group homes and fostering"
ReplyDeleteBut people aren't looking into adoption to fundraise families to stay together. I'm not staying they "never" will - I'm saying it's not their main objective.
Here's an example: Woman wants to become a mother. She wants to adopt from China because she's always wanted to have a daughter. She blogs about it. Adoptees come and criticize her.
So she says "What, would you rather children rot in an orphanage?"
The adoptees respond "No, of course not. If there is no guardianship/domestic options, and no relatives, and no way to change the cultural mindset that males are worth more than females, then adopt. But while you're doing that, why don't you look into why girls are being abandoned? Why don't you look into why no guardianship/domestic adoption is allowed, why relatives can't look after their families' children, and what it will take to change the cultural mindset so that girls don't 'rot' in an orphanage?"
The woman responds "I AM ONE PERSON. You seriously expect me to change an ENTIRE COUNTRY? What is wrong with you?"
Then some of the comments go "No, no, you as a single person could never change an entire country. But why not work with others to research WHY children are ending up in orphanages and work to change that?"
And so the woman says: "But I don't know anyone. I don't have names of people or agencies."
So she can't research? She can't find out names or organizations?
She could. But that is not her main goal, which is my point. Her goal is to adopt. She didn't look into adoption to research agencies that fund support for families. She looked into adoption to raise a child. Maybe she ends up researching these organizations AFTER she adopts, or DURING her adoption.
But not every adoptive parent does this. Not every adoptive parent sets out to do this. It is not their goal.
Dr. Richard Boas would be an example of someone who has informed himself about the social mores that cause separation of mothers from their babies for the purpose of adoption. He has formed an organization that actively works to keep families united in South Korea:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.kumsn.org/main/kumsn_aboutus_mission
@ Mei-Ling, Would you be open to a strangers ideas/suggestions after they have gone to your blog and publicily criticized you? Especially about something as emotional as parenting?
ReplyDeleteThe hypothetical you mention does happen every day on PAP and AP blogs and unfortunately this approach does more harm than good to adoption reform.
I don't care if your an expert on hang nails if your approach/delivery of your message is turning people off to your cause then you need to find a new approach.
Cherylp
There are lots of APs who are doing what the blogger described in the quote. The lists are not public but the people are sincere and committed to doing something. Things are not either/or. You may have adopted and grown to be more aware of the situation in your child's country. Or you may think of adoption as something good to reduce but not eliminate entirely, so you adopt. But simultaneously, you know you should inform yourself and do something to preserve families. Adopters do not think of children in institutions as *other people's children*. For the most part, they think of them as children who need parents. Reducing the number of children who need parents by reuniting them with their families or never separating them in the first place makes total sense. Even to adopters.
ReplyDeleteMei Ling, I agree with you that your argument to that PAP made total sense but I also agree with Cheryl that recent attempts to have PAPs and APs *see the light* or whatever is being done have caused deepening rifts and have only hardened many people in their position that certain ideas and individuals are best ignored.
Just wanted to mention that my last comment was meant to be a general "you" not specific to Mei-Ling.
ReplyDeleteCherylp
@ Anon: That wasn't a real conversation.
ReplyDelete@ Cherylp: "I don't care if your an expert on hang nails if your approach/delivery of your message is turning people off to your cause then you need to find a new approach."
You haven't seen the very patient manner and explanations of these other adoptees, have you?
It comes down to this: No matter how nice we are, no matter how polite we are, if the approach has anything to do other than adoption solutions, people aren't necessarily willing to hear it, as it is goes against what they set out to do.
That was also, kind of, my point.
"Reducing the number of children who need parents by reuniting them with their families or never separating them in the first place makes total sense."
ReplyDeleteRight, but then the issue is that decreasing the amount of children for adoption is a conflict of interest because then there are less children for adoption, subsequently resulting in less chances of a couple becoming parents at all...
@ Mei-ling, actually I read quite extensively on a variety of adoption blogs, adoptees (including yours), first parents, adoptive parents, etc. I also take the time to read the links that are attached.
ReplyDeleteMy experience has been that MOST of the adoptees (usually the same group) that post on an AP or PAPs blog are just there to flame in the comments section.
Honestly, I've seen some of your comments on other blogs, sometimes you are patient with APs and PAPs other times it's pretty obvious you have passed judgement and are just there to derride them.
So the long answer to you last question is no I very rarely see the "very patient manner and explanations of these adoptees." In fact I've read (far to) many hi-jacked comments sections where they go after other adoptees who don't "tow the party line."
cherylp
Mei Ling, it doesn't amount to a conflict of interest. Adoption is not going away tomorrow and everyone knows that. People can adopt today and still realize that they can lay the foundation for fewer adoptions tomorrow and still get educated about how family separations happen.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Cherylp. Not only are most of the current voices not "patient" and "explaining," a few sound incredibly vindictive and disturbed. It's a shame that a few tarnish the whole group.
"People can adopt today and still realize that they can lay the foundation for fewer adoptions tomorrow and still get educated about how family separations happen.
ReplyDeleteRight, but my point was that if more families are helped, less of them will end up in a situation where adoption would be necessary at all.
If there are less situations where adoption is a necessary solution, then there are less situations where a couple will end up coming across an available child.
I'd say that's a conflict of interest.
"Honestly, I've seen some of your comments on other blogs, sometimes you are patient with APs and PAPs other times it's pretty obvious you have passed judgement and are just there to derride them."
ReplyDeleteOn the latter part of that paragraph - which blogs?
@Mei-ling I don't recall specifically which ones, and I'm not going to go back through all the blogs I read to find the "offending" comments so they can be dissected here. If you don't feel that you have ever gone to other blogs and left judgemental comments then we will just have to agree to disagree.
ReplyDeleteMy point was that when you (general you) go on another persons(strangers) blog and leave a comment, you might want to consider how that comment will be received. Especially if you want your message to get heard.