Perfect Moment Monday is about noticing a perfect moment rather than creating one. Perfect moments can be momentous or ordinary or somewhere in between.
Once a week we engage in mindfulness about something that is right with our world. Everyone is welcome to join. Details on how to participate are at the bottom of this post, complete with bloggy bling.
Please visit the links of the participants at the bottom.
Here's a perfect moment from my week. I hope you'll share yours, too.
====================================
I accomplished something big (to me) and I'm feeling pretty good about it.
There's a book title that's been bandied around in Adoption World, a book with a mystique and a message that not everyone in Adoption World wants to hear or is ready to hear.
I asked Adoption World to read the book with me and have a dialog about it. It was risky, I knew. Flames could erupt, bloggy b0mbs could go off, feelings could get hurt, flying monkeys could be sicced (no offense to Flying Monkeys) if people assembled troops and defended their territories.
But with the help of somerespectedvoices, as well as from the 40 participants who have been very generous with their thoughts, so far the tone has been respectful, the discussion illuminating. The book is The Primal Wound: Understanding the Adopted Child, and if you have any interest in adoption at all -- if there's someone in your life involved in adoption -- you may wish to read what adoptees, firstparents, adoptive parents and pre-adoptive parents have to say about the impression the book made on them. See participants from Day 1, Day 2, and Day 3.
And read what author Nancy Verrier herself has to say next week, as she answers some of the questions we posed to her. Subscribe if you want to be notified when her responses are posted.
This book tour was a LOT of work to put this together. My hat is newly off to Melissa, who has run 2 dozen book tours over the years, and whose idea I shamelessly stole borrowed. I will not take her role in them for granted again.
Sigh of satisfaction. I'm in need of a short bloggy break.
====================================
To participate in Perfect Moment Monday:
Between Sunday night and Tuesday night, write up your own Perfect Moment in a blog post, on Twitter, on Facebook, or simply leave a comment below.
Grab the URL of your Perfect Moment.
Use MckLinky below to enter your (or your blog's) name and the URL of your Perfect Moment
Visit the Perfect Moments of others (from the links below), and let the writers know you were there.
Once you make a Perfect Moment post , you may place this button on your blog.
What Perfect Moment have you recently been aware of? Be sure to visit these moments and share the love, and please come back next week (click to subscribe).
I am very excited to be hosting my very first bloggy book tour. Well, my alter-ego, the Open Adoption Examiner is.
Our first selection is The Primal Wound: Understanding the Adopted Child by Nancy Verrier. I and my fellow Book Tourists -- adoptees, first parents, adoptive/adopting parents -- spent November (Adoption Awareness Month) reading this controversial book that was originally published in 1993 -- the early days of the open adoption era.
My take on it? Between the nodding of head and the shaking of head, my neck got quite the workout.
The premise is that a primal wound exists for every baby/child/teen separated from his/her biological mother. This includes not only adoptees, but also babies placed in incubators, children born via surrogacy and children placed in day care. The thesis continues that such a primal wound leads to issues that "center around separation and loss, trust, rejection, guilt and shame, identity, intimacy, loyalty, and mastery or power and control..."
There is a LOT of insight in this book, which was written by an adoptive mom and therapist whose daughter was in deep pain. I think it's well worth a read, especially at this stage of my children's lives (they are 8 and 6).
When my children were babies, I would not have been as open and receptive to Verrier's thesis as I am now. During the baby years, I felt there was no question that my children had bonded with me. With my first, I was in a state of euphoria -- after years of drought, I was finally a mom! We had reached the happily-ever-after and because of what we'd been through to get there, the rest was to be a piece of cake. With my second, the attachment took a bit longer, seemingly on my end. I was certain, after we morphed into a tightly knit family, that happily-ever-after had resumed.
But babies don't stay babies. They grow and individualize and wonder and work things out. Issues arise. Some are overt and I can help with them. Yet other deeper issues may exist beyond my ability to reach. Reading this book extends my abilities by giving me insight into what might be going on as my children grow -- what to watch for what emotions lie beneath the behaviors, and what I might be called on to do or to allow to play out.
Children with a primal wound, according to Verrier, tend to be either highly controlling or highly compliant, as a result of a pre-verbal assault on the rightness of their world, of the utter lack of control during this defining episode of their lives. "Having been manipulated at the beginning of their lives makes some adoptees manipulating and controlling."
Children who become compliant, according to Verrier, may become highly responsible -- not because they are healthy and well-integrated, but as a response to that initial rejection. "As Rick said, 'I knew I had to be a better person than the one who was given away.'"
Children with a primal wound, according to Verrier, tend to have difficulty in relationships, with intimacy, due to this early break. They often pre-emptively push away people (and jobs) to avoid being hurt again. "Being wanted by my adoptive parents doesn't compare to being unwanted by my birthmother. -- an adoptee."
Ouch. What a powerful statement. We parents are wise to listen.
There are more indications of the primal wound, all worth knowing about, if only so that I can recognize what may (or may not) be happening for my kids as they become tweens and teens and adults. In my opinion, knowing is almost always better than not knowing -- hence my advocacy of open adoption and open records.
The head shaking came from the anecdotal nature of the evidence. When dealing with human subjects, it is impossible to isolate variables. Some adoptees are controlling. Some adoptees are not controlling. Some non-adoptees are controlling. Some non-adoptees are not controlling. A causal link has not been established because of the inability to isolate adoption as THE factor in a personality.
Many of the noted issues -- "separation and loss, trust, rejection, guilt and shame, identity, intimacy, loyalty, and mastery or power and control" -- perfectly describe ME. My own parents say that *I* am controlling. I became overly responsible and strived to be perfect. I have had trouble with abandonment. I have felt unworthy. I have felt I don't fit in with my own family.
I was separated from my mom at age 5 by an oxygen tent, so maybe I *do* suffer the primal wound.
But is it possible that perhaps these issues are maybe somewhat universal?
I addressed this conundrum on this post (about a comment from Melissa's post on Adoption Chiasm), excerpted here:
Me: Anonymous, I gather, suffers from a Primal Wound.
"I was adopted as an infant, I have a great adoptive family that I love very much. I was not abused. I got everything I ever wanted, went to college and have had a good life. I would give it all up to have been raised by my 17 year old emotionally immature birth mother. I would give it all up to experience what it would be like to grow up feeling normal, like I belonged and happy."
In essence, Anon asserts that the road not taken (the abstract) is superior to the good life s/he has had (the concrete).
The appeal of that road is that it is a fairy-tale road. There are never any potholes, and the sun always shines, but not too hot. It's a smooth, gently sloping road with bounteous apple trees adorning the sides. In short, it's the angel you don't know compared to the devil you do.
No one can ever prove or disprove Anon's notion that a life with a not-ready-to-parent biological mom would have been better than a life with those who parented her. Because we each get just one road.
This is the crux.
The comment started a new train of thought about roads not taken, which, as Melissa pointed out to me, is not just part of the adoption experience. It is part of the human experience.
On to my three chosen questions, asked by others touring with me.
Verrier presumes that most adoptive parents are ill equipped to handle the emotional complexities experienced by adoptees. Did/do you feel well prepared to address the sense of loss that your child might experience? How did you prepare yourself? How do you help/plan to help your child resolve his/her feelings about his/her adoption? I went into parenting realizing that I was unprepared for both the parenting part and the adoptive parenting part, and also knowing that I would do my best to figure it all out.
To prepare myself, I have read lots and lots of first-person accounts of adoptees, running the gamut from happy to angry, which are very simplistic labels for very complex people.
I listen to what they say. I try to grasp what I can do to help (for example, keep communication open), what I should refrain from doing (for example, put the children in a position to divide their loyalties), and to also know when I cannot help -- when I must simply abide with my children while they work things out.
And I ask for the wisdom to know the difference.
How do you think open adoption changes the feel of this book? If you don't feel it changes it in any way, why? If you feel that it changes everything, in what ways? If you fall somewhere in the middle, how do you explain what does get changed and why other things are left unchanged? I think open adoption does change the situation. I don't think it ameliorates it, but it does go a ways in relieving the tension of all that not-knowing.
I have two main concerns about our open situations:
Our daughter, in a fully open adoption with both first parents, has enough information on how her life would otherwise have been to build an idyllic picture in her head about it. She can see the grass on the other side of the fence, but it will never be her yard. Yet her older bio-brother gets to play there all the time (source).
Our son's is an open door adoption, meaning his first parents are welcome in our lives if they want to knock on the door. In meeting the needs of our daughter, are we making it more difficult for our son? One of our parenting challenges is to deal with the differing levels of openness our two children have. I am hoping that Ms Verrier will address this situation when she answers tour questions on the Examiner page (subscribe if you want to make sure you see it.)
As far as openness being an improvement over closed adoption, the proof is in the pudding. My children will be the final arbiters on this question as it pertains to them, in about a decade or two.
What signs did you see in your child that support the concept of a primal wound derived from separation of mother and child in the process of adoption? I have what you might classify as a controlling child (I prefer to say assertive and spirited) and a compliant child (I prefer to say resilient and cuddly).
When we were going through reunion with my daughter's first father, I did also notice a push/pull as she was simultaneously drawn to Joe and also needed to know she was firmly rooted with us:
One afternoon we had an out-of-proportion argument over chores. She went from zero to steam-coming-out-the-ears in a flash. Her eyes a-blazing, she hissed, "And if I don't, are you going to send me to Joe?"
Whaaaaa?
Sudden flash of insight: she wasn't JUST worried that we would keep her from meeting Joe. She was ALSO worried that we might abdicate our place as her parents. This thought, I believe, filled her with terror. Like an earthquake was about to hit.
While I don't take it as gospel, I do recommend The Primal Wound for adoptive parents and pre-adoptive parents. Further, I recommend that the book be read periodically as the child grows and experiences different stages of cognitive development. It is also helpful to listen to the voices of adult adoptees -- for me, anyway.
To continue to the next leg of this book tour, please visit the main list at The Open Adoption Examiner.
I'm taking a seat at the Open Adoption Roundtable, where the assignment this session involves these italicized thoughts:
[Some say that] adopted persons should be free to initiate relationships with their first families--or not--on their own timetable. The parents (first and adoptive) in an adoption shouldn't make such an important and personal decision for them.
First, let me address the idea that adopted children (like children in general) should get to take the lead with their relationships. Yes! I support this -- in firstfamily, as well as in other relationships. But with no other extended family relationships do we say, "well wait to let little Bobby decide for himself how much and what kind of contact he wants."
Have you ever heard--or perhaps even made--statements like these?
#1: "The decision to have a relationship with her bio family should be hers when she is ready. Creating a relationship between them before she wants it might cause issues in the future."
Because I see our children's firstparents as extended family, I am going to replace one key word to see how logical the new statement sounds:
"The decision to have a relationship with her grandparents should be hers when she is ready. Creating a relationship between them before she wants it might cause issues in the future."
Ridiculous, no? Have a child wait until she's "ready" to meet her grandparents? When will she be ready, and how would you know?
#2: "Children deserve to have just one family during childhood and not to deal with anything adoption-related until they are more mature. A fully open adoption robs a child of a normal childhood."
The snag here (well, the one I'll address) is the word "normal." What is a "normal" childhood? This argument makes it sound like adoption cannot be part of "normal" childhood, that adoption is "abnormal" (some adoptees may agree with this, but it's certainly not an idea that parents should perpetuate).
The notion that being adopted is "abnormal" can do more damage to a child than "dealing with anything adoption related."
"We have medical histories and can share the information we have about their birth parents with our children now. If they feel a need to initiate contact with their birth families when they are adults, we will fully support them."
We do better to normalize our children's adoption from as early as possible. Our children come to us living in a gap between their biology and their biography. The sooner this schism is addressed and the less spread open the cleft is, the more likely it is to heal well and completely. Integration of the two parts of an adopted child's identity should, in my mind, be the responsibility of the decision-makers (parents) from Day 1 with their new child.
It seems to me that search and reunion after a lifetime of separation would be very difficult to navigate -- not just the relationship, but the feelings that go with establishing it. If I can prevent my children from having to go through search and reunion, I will. The way to do this is to foster contact with firstparents from as early on as possible.
Obviously, a parent needs to stay tuned in to his/her child to see signs of overwhelm or of distress. But the presence of these is not necessarily caused by openness. It's just that these feelings are out in the open, not buried. Dealing with any adoption issue in the light, in a supported way, without shame or secrecy -- THAT is what adoptive parents should initiate and provide.
As much as possible, I advocate that adoptive parents be introspective about the reasons behind their decisions regarding openness (or closed-ness). In a child-centered adoption, a parent's own fears and insecurities are examined and resolved, much the way we hope our children's will be. In a way, we are modeling the process toward wholeness for them.
One caveat: my remarks apply to situations where a family's safety is not threatened. I am talking about adoptions where the firstparents freely and lovingly placed a child, and are already child-centered-- not the drug-addicted wh0re stereotype, and not people who have boundary issues that could result in danger to anyone involved.
For more powerful thoughts on this topic, see this from Heather's archives.
Click over to Production, Not Reproduction to see what others have to say. And feel free to contribute your own thoughts.
It's a tough read for an adoptive parent. Believe me, I know. I've been stuck on Chapter 2 for awhile now.
I have so many questions as I read through this controversial book: questions I'd like to ask adult adoptees; musings I have for first parents; wonderings I have for other adoptive parents. With this Book Tour, I'll have a chance to ask these questions.
As will you, if you're so inclined.
What the heck am I talking about? Over on the Open Adoption Examiner page, I am hosting a Book Tour of Nancy Verrier's The Primal Wound. So far, 11 adoptees, 7 first parents, and 7 adoptive parents have signed up to participate. There are only 17 spots left.
Would you like to spend National Adoption Month reading this book, too?
Click over to see how the Book Tour works, what three bloggers are on the panel that is charged with helping to keep the ensuing dialog respectful, and who is participating in the tour so far.
This is a cucumber plant in our yard. I did not put it there. I planted cucumbers about 75 feet away in a carefully tended garden. But this rogue cuke somehow grounded itself in the rocks, near the children's swing set and assorted pairs of stomping feet. Stubborn thing.
In that carefully tended garden, I have melons. I did not plant these melons. Earlier in the summer Roger served a breakfast of honeydew with prosciutto and lime juice, and then mulched the waste. I suppose the seeds took root. Stubborn things.
In the front yard, hanging over the driveway, there is a sunflower (? botanists, please confirm?). I did not plant it. There are no similar flowers near it. It is so florally prolific that it droops in the path of Roger's car as he heads into and out of the garage. It's taken quite a beating, but still keeps producing flowers that reach for the light. Stubborn thing.
I honor the hearty biology of these organisms, that they strive to grow where they are. I admire their thirst for sunlight, their ongoing quest for growth, no matter what sense there is in their surroundings.
I dedicate this post to Tessa and Reed, the hearty, stubborn rogues that landed in my garden. Grow with me here!
I almost always embrace the idea that truth is best, especially in matters of adoption and donor conception. People have a right to know their genetic origins, in an age-appropriate way.
Normally, "age-appropriate" means when the child is old enough to understand, and in ways to help him/her understand.
I've recently come across a situation, though, that bothers me because it's managed to land itself in the very small gray area I have about truth-telling. And it is also an age-appropriate issue. But in this case, the affected person is in his 50s.
He was adopted as an infant in 1955. But no one told him. His parents have died, and only his cousin (also in her 50s) is left with his truth.
Should she tell? Should this man know his truth at this stage of his life?
Should she stay quiet?
Should she attempt to guess what he would want (how could anyone know what they would want in this instance?)?
Is it any of her business? Does she bear a responsibility either way?
If you have some thoughts, I would love to hear them. Leave them here, or visit my friend Corey. .
I've reviewed dozens of adoption profiles, some in the draft stage and some that had already languished at an agency for months and months. I thought it might be helpful to reveal some of the common issues I see with ailing profiles. I call them the "Terrible Toos."
7 Common Mistakes in Adoption Profiles
Too perfect: Alan and Jackie* had perfect teeth. Their parents and siblings had perfect teeth, too, AND flawless skin. They took perfect vacations together and tended a perfectly manicured lawn. They were blessed and happy!
Of course, they were only showing parts of themselves they deemed "acceptable." And, of course, a reader might be put off by a couple that belongs on a magazine cover. I encouraged Alan and Jackie to add dimensions to their profile by getting real and opening up about their dreams and heartaches. Three dimensions is more attracting than two.
And REAL is the real draw.
Too much: this 20-pager for Debbie and Curt went on and on. It left nothing to be revealed and came across as self-centered. Sometimes more is less and vice versa.
Too self-indulgent: similar to the lengthy profile is the us-us-us profile. It is a monologue rather than an invitation to a dialog -- a subtle difference.
Sunny and Blake each wrote about themselves for several pages, not even acknowledging that there was a reader. Their narratives were not composed out of true egotism, but rather just not knowing how to write about and present themselves in a conversational way.
Once Sunny and Blake changed their approach from a "book report" style to something else, their profile got noticed -- and chosen.
What was this magic style? Instead of each one telling about him/herself (which is hard), Sunny and Blake told about each other (which is easy). Moreover, doing so invited the reader into the profile: You should see Sunny when she's coaching soccer. The children flock to her like pigeons on bread crumbs. And it allowed the reader to see the couple through loving eyes.
Too pretentious (I haven't actually see this trait in a profile, but I bet it exists): there's no need to show off the driving range in your back yard or your annual trips to Paris or your collection of sports cars. Such shows of wealth are not what an expectant parent finds comforting -- wealth of time and love are. Plus, pretentiousness can build a barrier instead of finding common ground with your reader.
Too guarded: while there may be photos and text, the reader is left not really knowing anything about the hopeful parents.
Gina and Ken had recently been scammed and were understandably cautious. They wanted to protect themselves from repeated heartbreak. In doing so, they built a wall to keep Bad Things out. But the funny thing about walls is that they are multipurpose. They also keep Good Things out.
Throughout their pages, it was clear that Gina and Ken didn't want to reveal too much about themselves. Reading their profile was the equivalent of trying to have a conversation with a person whose arms are tightly crossed over the chest.
The wall was evident in closing line of their profile:
Please contact us only if you are serious about an adoption plan.
Clearly, this wasn't a problem that would be solved just by wordsmithing. I counseled Gina and Ken about what a true (not scamming) expectant parent considering adoption might be going through. We talked about the myths surrounding birth/firstparents, and what they could expect to find when working with an ethical adoption professional. A deeper understanding of their intended audience helped them to risk more revelations and invitations in their profile.
Too blah: Katie and Gil were careful not to put anything in their profile that was too anything. They were rabid Cornhusker fans, but didn't want to offend anyone who might back an opposing team. They loved to ride motorcycles, but didn't want to freak out a reader who might be more cautious. They attended their church regularly but didn't want to mention it in case theirs wasn't the same faith as the readers.
In short, Katie and Gil hid their lights under a bushel.
I interviewed them to find out what made them unique and vibrant and found the qualities mentioned above. Once they revised their profile to show themselves OUT LOUD, it wasn't long before their profile was chosen as the perfect match for an expectant parent.
Too footloose: Sam and Bill's profile had photos of them on a honeymoon in the Bahamas, toasting each other with umbrella drinks. There was also a photo series of them zip-lining in the cloud forest of Costa Rica, and more of them scuba diving in crystal waters. To round off the seasons, they told about how they loved to ski during the weekends during the winter.
It's hard for a reader to envision Sam and Bill with a child.
I asked them to tell me what their lives would look like once they had a child. With their answers, they revised their profile to reflect their future (as parents) as well as their past (as an active, spontaneous couple).
I must say a word (or more) about being real.
More than scrapbooking abilities, more than a gift with the written word, more than anything else, authenticity is the key to an adoption profile. SHOW WHO YOU ARE. Not who you WISH you were, not who you think someone ELSE thinks you should be, but who. you. are.
Imagine back when you first met your spouse. If you misrepresented yourself just to make an initial good impression, eventually your house of cards would fall and your opportunity for love would have evaporated. It was vitally important with a partner, and it's equally important with the firstparents of your future child: don't HIDE who you are, but rather REVEAL who you are. And show yourselves in your best light.
(Originally appeared on All Thumbs Reviews. But you already know this because you subscribe to my other blog, right? RIGHT? All Thumbs is where Chicklet and I dish up sassy stuff weekly. Strongly, but weekly. Read to bottom of post for two giveaways currently running.)
I cried, my sobs not easily muffled. In the cramped airline seat I wept, hoping the woman next to me wouldn't notice. Damn Elizabeth Flock.
No, Elizabeth Flock wasn't my seat mate. Elizabeth Flock is the author of the novel I just finished. I'd read a review of the book in the Denver Post and I contacted the publisher for my own review copy.
Sleepwalking in Daylight is a suburban everymom story told by Samantha, a SAHM who endured infertility and adoption and who now parents a teenage girl (via adoption) and twin 8 year old boys (via IVF). She and her husband, Bob, have lost all connection with each other, and Samantha finds intimacy with another man she meets in a Starbucks. This new connection fills Samantha's void and consumes her.
Alternate chapters are told by Cammy, Samantha's 16 year-old daughter. Cammy was born addicted and placed for adoption by her birthmother at age 2. Bob was never on board with the adoption, and he later told Cammy of her adoptedness in a scarring fashion. Cammy's parents are self-absorbed and unhappy, her twin brothers have each other, and she spirals down into a morass of drugs and debasing activities.
What this book is not: great literature, complicated, deep, lengthy.
What this book is: hard to put down, heartbreaking, and, I would venture, controversial for those in the adoption triad.
Some adoptees will be incensed with the way Cammy is portrayed; some will point to the Primal Wound and say, "See?"
Some birthparents will claim the firstmom was portrayed as stereotypical and inconsequential.
Most adoptive parents will shudder at the parenting issues, inextricably entwined with adoption issues.
The literary technique called chiasm is present in Cammy's adoption story. In between, there are roads not taken. What would her life had been like had her firstmom not placed her? Surely better, she is certain.
Samantha faces her roads not taken, too. What if she hadn't pushed Bob so hard to adopt? What if she'd eased up on this particular (and shady) adoption? What if she had remained child-free? Would any of these routes have taken her to a happier place, where she was actually awake in her life?
I asked the author how she researched the Cammy character. How did she formulate the angst about her birthmother, the not fitting in, the lack of self-love? Were these things simply for storyline purposes, or was this character based on traits Elizabeth had observed in adopted people? Her answer:
"I did some research on at-risk teens, mostly by reading recent articles online. But I'd be lying if I said I did much more than that. I simply tried very hard to imagine what it would feel like to be Cammy. Feeling as if she didn't fit in her own family. It's hard enough for teens to try to fit in at school with their peers but at home Cammy was also desperate for a connection that was ever so slightly out of reach. I felt incredibly sad for her. I think we all have a little Cammy in us, even if it's just a tiny bit. I tried to tap in to that."
This is Elizabeth Flock's fourth novel. She tells a good story in a real and conversational way. Her pre-novelist life was as a journalist for People and Time magazines.
In spite of the tears, I am glad I read this book. Sleepwalking in Daylight is billed as a story about marriage, but it also spoke volumes to me about parenting. The book reminds me to try and see life through my children's eyes -- and serves as a warning to keep me from sleepwalking through these parenting years.
And if our sassy reviews are not enough to entice you, how about 2 great giveaways going on at All Thumbs this week? One is for a pair or retractable and chic earbuds and the other for a $250Visa gift card. Go on. Click over.)
While Melissa's humble nature may not allow her to pump her soon-to-be-published book, I can do so shamelessly. She may not be able to feature my New Years' Day post in Roundup or in the Lost & Found, but I don't think she can stop me from reposting it for the Show & Tell audience.
Crafty, ain't I?
============================================================== I'm showing and telling a button. And the person who inspired it.
From January 1, 2009:
I dedicate this time of firsts to the first blogger I read, the first person I tweeted, the first person to win Lori's Childhood Trivia, the first person to draw me in MS Paint.
Awhile back Mel posted about a wishing tree. I wonder what one of her wishes for 2009 could be. Maybe it has to do with a challenge posed to her by a family member who is employed by a major publishing company: for her to pre-sell more than 2000 copies of her book through her smaller publisher.
3. Consider Mel's book as a gift for anyone else you know who is facing infertility and is looking for a way through. Yeah. Go back to #1 and change your order to 2. Or more.
4. Write a post periodically over the next few months to remind your readers about the availability of Mel's book. If you do write a post, come back here to leave your link in a comment so that Mel will have a listing of all her cheerleaders.
May 2009 bring your own wishes to you. May you be blessed with love and joy and peace and harmony.
===================================
To see what the rest of the class is showing and telling, go to Mel of Show & Tell.
It's the first moments of the first day of the first month of the new year. (Duh.)
I dedicate this time of firsts to the first blogger I read, the first person I tweeted, the first person to win Lori's Childhood Trivia, the first person to draw me in MS Paint.
Awhile back Mel posted about a wishing tree. I wonder what one of her wishes for 2009 could be. Maybe it has to do with a challenge posed to her by a family member who is employed by a major publishing company: for her to pre-sell more than 2000 copies of her book through her smaller publisher.
3. Consider Mel's book as a gift for anyone else you know who is facing infertility and is looking for a way through.
4. Write a post periodically over the next few months to remind your readers about the availability of Mel's book. If you do write a post, come back here to leave your link (through Mr Linky) so that Mel will have a listing of all her well-wishers.
May 2009 bring your own wishes to you. May you be blessed with love and joy and harmony.
ETA: Please click here to "vote" for the Creme de la Creme list on Kirtsy. Make sure you click all the way through to the actual Creme post, or you haven't actually voted.
1/2 Anglo, 1/2 unknown race due 2-16-09 fetus appears to be a boy presented 11-25-08
Mother wants a married couple or single woman Heterosexual only agency adoption $4800 AdoptLink + $25,000 estimated including finalization if baby is mixed race $39,000 estimated including finalization if baby is Anglo
AdoptLink(currently about a third of the way down; search page for "Aleda.")
The current issue of Adoptive Families magazine (September/October) has a helpful article for people who are preparing to become parents through adoption.
The article is not available online, so I'm posting some tidbits here. You can then can go to your local bookstore and get the issue. Or subscribe here (clicking on the cover photo will take you to Amazon) and have it delivered to you bi-monthly for the next year.
The article, The Birthparent Perspective, offers initial results from a study conducted by the National Institutes of Health. "The study recruited 360 sets of linked birthparents, adoptive parents, and adopted children, rather than putting out a call for volunteers, and this means greater accuracy in results." Here are some highlights:
The majority of birthparents were aged 22-32
Point of pregnancy at which expectant mother began working with an agency: 1st trimester: 17%. 2nd trimester: 37%. 3rd trimester: 35%. After delivery: 11%.
The three most important factors (by far) in choosing adoptive parents are (1) educational opportunities for the child, (2) a close marital relationship, and (3) financial security. [I take this to mean stable rather than wealthy.]
Three qualities historically emphasized by agencies -- physical resemblance to birth family, stay-at-home mom, and similar religious background -- are less important today.
"As time goes on," says the article, "33% of birthmothers would like more openness 3-6 months postpartum, and that figure increases to 38% by 18 months postpartum." Adoptive fathers, while less desiring of openness, also increase the amount of contact they want as time passes.
Almost no one wants less contact. "The good news is that almost everyone -- birthparents and adoptive parents alike -- reports being satisfied with openness during the first and second year of the child's life."
And this: "Openness significantly correlates with satisfaction and post-adoption adjustment among birth and adoptive families alike."
Finally, this from one researcher, who is also an adoptee: "The more you talk with your children in an open, positive way about the fact that they were adopted, the less of a problem it will be for them."
The study will follow the families for at least four more years.
The magazine itself polled families across the US to find out how open AF readers are, on average. (Note: these are self-selected participants, which can skew results positive.) Some of these findings on adoptive parents:
44% were matched during the third trimester, and 33% at the hospital or after the birth
37% characterized their adoption as very open
23% say that since the child was born, the adoption has become more open. 51% say it has stayed the same.
58% would like the openness to stay the same. 39% want it to be more open.
There is much more of interest in this article, and I recommend you get your hand on the issue soon.
UPDATE: Heather PNR and triad are part of the NIH study. She reports that a link to the study (called "Bridging the Divide") can be found here.
I am currently holding two completely different realities in one space.
We have entered a new arena in our open adoption. Tessa's birthfather has come into the picture, with our blessing. Things are going very well, and I will write about the reunion more as it becomes appropriate.
But back to the box.
I remember many years ago a thirtysomething episode that featured a double-date dinner as seen by each of the four people in attendance. The first 15 minutes was from Hope's point of view, the next segment was from Elliot's, the third from Nancy's and finally we see from Michael's eyes. We see the same events interpreted by four people, with each version being very, very different.
I was left wondering which of the four versions was the accurate one. I kept trying to splice together clips to get the One True View.
Which is both silly and impossible. Perception is reality. And since perception is uniquely personal, it follows that reality is uniquely personal.
So now, as I piece together the events that led to Tessa's existence and to us being her parents, that thirtysomething episode has new meaning to me. Now I have the wisdom not to ask which account is the "real" one. And I just might have the breadth and depth to hold both versions as valid.
I don't think either Crystal or Joe truly believe I am doing so. But I am.
If I call her “my daughter’s other mother” it may seem different from what it is.
I met Crystal because we each had a problem. Mine had nooks with crannies, and hers had crannies with nooks. Our oddly- shaped problems fit together, and we became each other's solution.
Seven years ago, I was experiencing the famine that is infertility; Crystal was dealing with the feast that is an unintended pregnancy, while living in an untenable situation.
In a way, we share a daughter.
It might seem normal for the story to have ended back where it began — with a tiny, squalling baby. One of us leaving the hospital with Tessa, and the other going home empty-armed. A winner and a loser.
But nothing about our situation has been “normal.” We have forged an unlikely friendship over the years as we continually create our open adoption. We do this for Tessa, but also for ourselves. While there is not really word to describe our relationship — sister is not accurate, friend is insufficient — we continue to define the previously undefined. I love my daughter’s birthmom. It’s that simple, yet there are layers of complexity.
(I tell the full story of our triad at Drama 2B Mama, with the story of my son’s adoption, as well).
How did open adoption happen so effortlessly for us? We are often asked that question. We have examined our history to find the markers of success. We find that one word captures the nature of our relationship: open. We have an open-hearted open adoption.
Now we teach people some keys to having a successful open adoption. On the morning of October 11, Crystal and I will offer a 2-hour class for pre-adoptive parents at Colorado Free University. We talk about choosing an agency, from both the adoptive- and the birth-parent perspective. We cover ethics in adoption, and why they matter so much to hopeful parents. We talk about the dos and don’ts of an adoption profile. We alert hopeful adoptive parents to the pitfalls that can happen in an open situation, as well as how to avoid them.
[November, 2008 update -- content for this class is now offered by phone or as a 2-on-2 consultation in the metro-Denver area. More info.]
And we show what an open adoption can look like. We de-freakify it, if you will.
Registration is open through October 10. The class is priced for singles ($24 or $36) and for couples ($46 or $68), with the lower tuition available to CFU members. The class takes place on CFU’s Lowry campus.
Anyone who has ever been told “just adopt” is encouraged to join us. And to open to the possibilities that await.
Could it be that the already creative Mel is stoked about a new project that could have positive and wide-ranging implications?
Mel mused about bridges on a recent BlogHer post. And for me, the most striking thing she said at our panel was: "It's not about fertile people vs infertile people; it's about sensitive vs insensitive people."
To that end, Melissa has unveiled a new project, Bridges, an awareness consortium to "take the taunts off of the playground one post at a time."
I am honored to be a Contributing Editor for Bridges, responsible for finding posts and articles that build bridges in the domestic adoption community.
And here's where I need your eyes and clicks.
Was there an eloquent post by a birth/firstmother that made you say, "Ahhhh, now I see." Or just the right sentiments expressed by an adoptee that deepened your understanding of his/her experience? Or a wise post by an adoptive parent? Have YOU written something that speaks to sensitivity and compassion?
Please alert me to any bridge-builders you find that merit the Bridges audience.
Adoption is just a part of the project. Also included are single motherhood, surrogacy, child-free living, loss, neonatal death, body image, cancer, parenting with special needs, addictions, allergies, mental health, and more. Melissa is open to including other suggested categories.
I think this is something you'll want to be part of.
Here are my requests of you:
Let me know of any domestic adoption posts that have touched you, taught you, made you think, by leaving a comment here or by emailing me.
Consider submitting your blog to Melissa for inclusion on the Awareness Blogroll.
For more on Melissa's amazing vision for this site, click here.
Add Awareness Bridges to your Reader Feeder. There will be good stuff here that will change the world, or at least make its playgrounds kinder.
__________________________
Joanne at Forever Parents is holding a book giveaway. Click on over before August 10 for a chance to win one of three great books.
Three weeks from now, on a Saturday morning, Crystal (Tessa's firstmom) and I will teach a workshop on open adoption at Colorado Free University.
[November, 2008 update -- content for this class is now offered by phone or as a 2-on-2 consultation in the metro-Denver area. More info.]
Thinking About Open Adoption?
"Just adopt." you've heard, as if it's no big deal.
But it is. It's common for couples looking into domestic infant adoption to feel daunted by the options and the mazes sprawled before them. Once you get some clarity, the path to parenthood becomes much more doable. Come find out more about open adoption, where we'll look at:
the steps you must take to ensure an ethical adoption (and why this is your concern)
what exactly IS open adoption
secrets of a successful open adoption how to avoid the pitfalls that can come up in the adoption process
This two-hour class is taught by two mothers in one open adoption: Lori, MA, is an adoptive mom of two who tells her story at Drama 2B Mama and has written for Adoptive Families magazine. Crystal is the firstmom of Lori's daughter, mother to a son, and a student of Love & Logic. Over the last several years, Lori and Crystal have forged an unlikely friendship and have shared with people considering open adoption their dual perspectives about how to have one.
If you're in the Denver area on August 2, please join us from 9-11 am at CFU's Lowry campus. We'll repeat the class on Saturday morning, October 11. CFU charges a modest tuition, and you may register here. Of course, I am happy to answer any questions you might have. Just leave a comment or shoot me an email. .
If you're an adoptive parent (or if you will be), Adoption Utopia might look one way.
If you have placed a child, Adoption Utopia might look another way.
And if you are a person who was adopted, Adoption Utopia might look completely different from the other two.
Worlds apart?
It's a feat to balance sometimes competing needs and rights among the people involved in an adoption triad.
The scope for my answers includes only adoptions where firstparents make a conscious decision to place their child, NOT when the decision is made for them by a child welfare agency.
Of course, others with a different experience may weigh in with a different scope (thanks, Joanne!)
Here are my thoughts to some questions I wonder about -- I invite you to share your viewpoint, too.
1. What responsibilities do adoptive parents* have for their children's firstparents*, both before and after relinquishment?
Adopting parents accurately portray themselves and what degree of openness they can commit to. Once they commit, it is only ethical that they abide by their agreement, whether or not it is a formal, written contract.
Adoptive parents use only respectful terms when talking with the child about his firstparents. This is not only morally right toward the firstparents, but necessary for the child to know that his origins are worthy. Denigrating the firstparents denigrates the child.
2. What responsibilities should the adoption system have for placing parents? In Adoption Utopia, expectant parents considering adoption get neutral counseling about both parenting and adoption options. Good adoption agencies provide this, and adopting parents should use one that does (there is enlightened self-interest for doing so: birthparents who don't feel victimized by The System are more likely to heal and move forward, which is better for all involved, especially the child. "Stuck" is not good.)
Adoption is only ethical if the firstparents place with full information and no coercion. All resources for the parenting option are presented.
3. And how does the "best interest of the child" fit in with these responsibilities? Granted, it's too early for me to tell yet since my children are still young. But one of the reasons I decided not to put a divide between me and my children's firstmoms was so that Tessa and Reed would never feel like they had to choose sides. There is no choice to make if we are all on the same side.
I hear from people adopted in the 1960s that they would never search for their birthparents because of the sense of disloyalty to the parents who raised them. Why would I want to inflict such a burden on my child, saying, in essence, "If you want to satisfy your natural curiosity about your medical history and genetic makeup, circumstances around your birth and relinquishment, and to know how it feels to be around people who look like you and have similar mannerisms -- in order to get answers you're going to have to betray me."
My children can be true to themselves without being disloyal to me.
So we keep in touch with Crystal and Michele. When open adoption was just a theory to me, this was a calculated move FOR my children. But in reality, I have gained a very close friend in Crystal -- someone whose friendship I genuinely enjoy. Channels are open to Michele, if and when she would like a renewed relationship with us.
***
In Adoption Utopia, every woman in an unplanned pregnancy for whom parenting is not a viable option would find the people who long to parent a child. They would be truthful with each other and be true to their word. The child that unites them would suffer only from having too many people love him/her.
What is your Adoption Utopia like? What responsibilities would you like to see?
* normally, parents are parents, without preceding adjectives. But for the sake of this discussion, I use qualifying terms for adoptive parents and first/birthparents.
image: Salvadore Dali, Girl in the Window
________________________________
In the market for a Smart Phone? Make sure you visit All Thumbs for the latest product review.
For some behind-the-scenes reasons, I'd like to repeat this post from 2007. _____________
When we first brought Tessa home, my grandma was quite disturbed in meeting Crystal, Tessa's firstmom.
Now, I love my Grandma, and she was an amazing woman. Almost 90 years old, she had seen space shuttles and the internet replace horse & buggies and telegrams.
But she was stuck in an absolutely incorrect view of birthmothers.
She was both grateful to Crystal for making me a mom, and contemptuous of her for "giving up her child." Indeed, most mothers -- by birth or adoption -- have trouble imagining the unimaginable. Grandma couldn't get over, "what kind of woman does this?"
Here's a post that helps explain what an act of love relinquishment can be. The bigger point of Abebech's post is that adoption should only take place when the mother absolutely can't (or won't, in rare cases) take care of a child. It's called the "Burning Building Test," and I use it when I teach classes to hopeful adoptive parents.
I was impressed, at the time, by an adoptive mother who had defended the mother of her child. Someone had said "I could never give up my baby," to which she responded, "Could you if you were in a burning building?"
And she elaborated: relinquishing a child for adoption was like tossing your child to safety, from the window of a burning building. It was not an unloving act, the act of a woman pathologically unattached to her child, but a supreme act of love.
Yes, I thought, that's a good way to explain it to people outside the adoption community, people who don't get what it is our child's mother would have to have done: a woman would be compelled to throw her child from a burning building, and I would be there to catch that child. She and I would recognize each other equally as mothers, and I would know that there was nothing else that she could do.
I explain why it's right and necessary that adopting couples use an ethical agency, one that doesn't pursue or coerce expectant mothers. One that helps fully explore the option of parenting. One that cares more about the adoption process than about the agency's stats on placements. One that can balance the needs and rights of both adopting couples and expectant parents. One that is aware of the Burning Building Test.
Crystal says that our agency passed this test. And because of that, she and I have created a symbiotic (rather than adversarial) relationship that endures years later, with no end in sight.
That's what kind of woman does this. One with boundless love for her child.
[November, 2008 update -- content for this class is now offered by phone or as a 2-on-2 consultation in the metro-Denver area. More info.]
Crystal (Tessa's firstmom) and I have been up to something.
I'm excited to announce that Crystal and I are teaching a workshop on open adoption through Colorado Free University. It will be offered three times, once each in the spring, summer and fall. Here's the content:
Thinking About Open Adoption?
"Just adopt." you've heard, as if it's no big deal.
But it is. It's common for couples looking into domestic infant adoption to feel daunted by the options and the mazes sprawled before them. Once you get some clarity, the path to parenthood becomes much more doable. Come find out more about open adoption, where we'll look at:
the steps you must take to ensure an ethical adoption (and why this is your concern)
what exactly IS open adoption
secrets of a successful open adoption how to minimize the pitfalls that can come up in the adoption process
This two-hour class is taught by two mothers in one open adoption: Lori, MA, is an adoptive mom of two who tells her story at Drama 2B Mama and has written for Adoptive Families magazine. Crystal is the firstmom of Lori's daughter, mother to a son, and a student of Love & Logic. Over the last several years, Lori and Crystal have forged an unlikely friendship and have shared with people considering open adoption their dual perspectives about how to have one.
We're offering our first class on Wednesday, May 28 from 6:30-8:30 pm in the central Denver area. The class will be repeated on Saturday morning, August 2 from 9-11 near Lowry, as well as on Saturday morning, October 1. CFU charges a very modest tuition, and you may register here. Of course, I am happy to answer any questions you have about the class.
If you know someone who might be interested in this class and in Denver one of those days, please email him/her the link to this post.
There is a lot of waiting and anxiety in our community right now. Today I have what I hope is a calming passage, a way to rise above the daily disquiet and see that there IS a big picture that is being composed moment by moment.
From Chapter One – A Mystical Path to Motherhood
Enter a little puff of smoke.
As the sun finally set on the summer solstice that year, we stood before the snapping pine in the fire pit, about to enter the sweat lodge again -- only this time with no demands for a solution. An energetic healer had told us to make the list, burn it and have faith. On that paper was written our wishes for a child:
1) a spiritually advanced soul 2) a soul with something to teach us 3) a soul we have something to teach 4) a soul with enough flexibility to enjoy and benefit from our lifestyle and one last wish for all three of us: 5) the financial needs for this family to be met
Letting go of the physical need to have biological children sent a swift pulse of liberation through my body so suddenly that my eyes twitched. Watching those wishes go up in smoke, everything at last made perfect sense. I’d always felt destined for a more mystical path to motherhood.
George looked at me and whispered, “Did you feel that?” I had: a slight pulling sensation from the smoke floating away.
“You know,” I whispered back, “I’ve been thinking about adoption my entire life.” George closed his eyes and inhaled a deeper breath than he’d taken in months. His sigh captured the unspoken truth that stood between us -- his desperate guilt and my hidden disappointment -- and released it into the fire. We were moving on.
Every test to gain permission from local, state and federal authorities to adopt a child was as anxiety-ridden as a prenatal exam. Yet there was no due date to plan the rest of our lives around. We were strapped to an emotional roller coaster: filling out forms; waiting; more forms; more waiting; being judged on paper as to whether we were fit to parent. The waiting required absolute submission to the divine, for adoption is a manifestation of the soul, a birth of the heart. You consciously will a child into your life, and there is magic in it.
Mysteriously, that little puff of smoke found its way from the Wind River Mountains of Wyoming all the way to Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
