Adopted in the UK

The life of a UK adoptee

Posts Tagged ‘Discussion

Lost Daughters: Baby Veronica: What Adoption Does to Adopted Persons from a Legal Perspective

with 7 comments

Lost Daughters: Baby Veronica: What Adoption Does to Adopted Persons from a Legal Perspective.

This post from Julie details much of why my Petitioning Parliament post was written. This is the basis of many of the issues created by adoption, some of which I extrapolated upon in my reply to Sir @martinnarey (who still hasn’t responded to my My Heart’s Desire post).

Julie’s post over on Lost Daughters (and the comments that follow it) talks about the impact that the act of being adopted will have upon Veronica’s life. The act of adoption changes the status of a person in ways that are more than just legal. The societal aspect of living as an adoptee is a minefield. If we’re happy with adoption, then we’re happy with the fact that a child is growing up unrelated to their own kin – whyever this happens, it is something sad. If we’re pissed at adoption, then obviously we must have “had a bad experience”.

One of my more recent FB page creations is The Lucky Adoptee, who – contrary to popular perception – I consider myself to be. I did get the steady life that adoption promises. While we weren’t by any stretch well off, my APs were excellent at juggling money (a trait I sadly missed out on picking up ;)) and so the life I lived was comfortable. In fact, were it not for the issues that BEING ADOPTED has caused for my life, I actually would’ve had that fabled “better life” that is the lure of adoption.

#WASO40 hints at posts relating to the future, so for inclusion I’m finishing where I started; wanting to get legislation changed so that the ADOPTEE is the one who ultimately gets to decide what they want for their life. Giving adoptees the chance to annul/overturn/however you wanna phrase it THEIR OWN adoptions scares people though – any of us could become ungrateful bastards if we can all undo what’s been done to us, think of how the number of adopters’d plummet if they knew we the adoptees could have the final say over whether our adoptions’re “forever” or not.

Advertisements

Written by 7rin

Sat, 26 October, 2013 at 7:22 am

My heart’s desire

with one comment

In the thread from which https://twitter.com/martinnarey/statuses/375024235753639936 descends, there’s the usual bunch of us complaining that Sir @martinnarey isn’t listening to us and doesn’t want to help any of us get anywhere ’cause we don’t fit into his “helpable” category of #adoption stuff. The linked post is the first time he’s commented directly to me to do anything other than answer ‘easy’ stat’s/yes/no stuff since my 7rin respecting Narey? post, a point upon which my protestations have been based on.

I’m guessing from his response that Sir @martinnarey hasn’t been reading too many of the links I’ve been posting with his @ name attached. Then again, he may’ve just been confused by me pointing out that I actually wasn’t fighting for face-to-face time with him, unlike so many of the others within the thread. My fight is not personally for me, and so doesn’t need to be conducted behind closed doors in order to protect identities or ongoing cases nor any such things, which is why while I understand his request to take this to email, I’d actually rather not because I need *MY* comments open to others in order to make sure I’m not missing any fundamental points out from my reasonings during my arguments.

Thus, this post is answering what it is I’m hoping that Sir @martinnarey may be able to help current and future adoptees with.

For those who’re unaware of the extent of my ‘relationship’ with Sir @martinnarey, https://adoptedintheuk.wordpress.com/tag/martin-narey/ will give you a brief run-down. I don’t dislike the guy, and think that actually yeah, his heart is (generally) “in the right place”. However, I do think he is deeply misguided in his belief that the impact of adoption loss on adoptees is “minimal”. There is a massive collection of voices out in the adoptee blogosphere explaining quite how much simply the act of getting adopted hurts in ways that the unadopted usually fail to comprehend, and even those like Michael Gove who’re Adoption Poster Children(tm) demonstrate quite how much pain even the “happy” adoptees get. Adoptee socialisation is insidious, and unrecognised as trauma by far far far too many.

I summarised the two small changes that *I’m* wanting to be made to adoption practice in the UK (heck, in the whole world, actually) in https://adoptedintheuk.wordpress.com/2013/06/26/stop-trashing-adoption/ but for Sir @martinnarey and anyone else who might not’ve read the post, I’ll quote it here:

I’ll stop trashing adoption when just two very very simple things happen.

1. I’ll stop trashing adoption when http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/38120 has been passed into law, thus giving the ADOPTEE the right to make THEIR OWN choice.

2. I’ll stop trashing adoption when https://adoptedintheuk.wordpress.com/tag/post-adoption-support/ is available to ALL ADOPTEES from professionals fully conversant with the devastating impact that the process of adoption can have upon the psyche of the adoptee.

That’s it.

Nothing more.

However, back in the 7rin respecting Narey? post, Sir @martinnarey conceded that despite his position as the incumbent UK Government’s Adoption Advisor (and not an Adoption Tsar as suggested by some press :p), he:

can’t help you with your wish to change the law so that an adult can annul adoption.

What I don’t understand, and what I’d like Sir @martinnarey to explain to me (and anyone else willing to read his words) why it is the UK Government’s Adoption Advisor *can’t* help with such a thing?

Of course, personally I believe that such moves should come with a whole other bunch of changes in legislation about how getting names added on/taken off BIRTH certificates, but that’s a whole ‘nother bunch of posts on their own.

I’ll also keep fighting until adoptee get access to specialised adoptee-comprehending psych mental health support from people who understand the true depth of issues that adoptees grow up experiencing. While I know budgets are being cut left, right, and centre, and that even juvenile adoptees are going short on the help needed, if you’re (generic Governmental Minister/Advisor etc.) going to be creating more of us faster – at least give us all the tools to be able to deal with it.

What I’d really really REALLY like from Sir Martin Narey is the support to get these two significant but minor changes through, even if only eventually (I know legislation can take years of pushing), but I don’t think I’m gonna get it. What I’d at least appreciate is an answer to the points I’ve raised in this post, taking into account the stuff said in the 7rin respecting Narey? post. Such an answer doesn’t need to be on here, it can be one his wonderfully crafted over at SlideShare or anything like that. My only requests are that such an answer is both publicly available, and a continuation not ending of discussion.

This post also being added to http://theadoptionsocial.com/weekly-adoption-shout-out/weekly-adoption-shout-out-waso-week-33/

Written by 7rin

Sun, 8 September, 2013 at 1:07 am

Is child abuse natural?

leave a comment »

The following post was originally started {quote}5 months ago (8 March, 2013 @ 13:15:06){/quote}

I’m releasing it into the wild now – unfinished – after seeing Cheryl Bell’s Twitter post that linked to The Telegraph article, Head of children’s services chiefs accused of ‘defeatism’ after he says ‘we will never prevent all child deaths’.

It will, for the immediate future, remain in this unfinished state as I am still in recovery from my latest adoption-induced breakdown. However, I don’t think he’s wrong, and have been wanting to look into this in greater detail, hence the post being started.

{{ – – Everything below this line was in the draft that I’d saved – – }}

I was hunting for a post I remember reading recently on animals in the wild being abandonded by their moms to put in the “Taking newborns” post.

Mother’s Day Mayhem: “Worst” Animal Moms?

http://blogs.psychcentral.com/attachment/2013/04/for-the-health-of-our-society-normal-child-abuse-prevention/

{quote}
This 2010 UK study is among many that show that the brain doesn’t reach maturity as once theorized until people are at least age 30. Executive functioning, such as planning and decision-making, social awareness and behavior, empathy and other personality traits, are the last bits of cognitive functions to fully develop.
{/quote}

Written by 7rin

Fri, 2 August, 2013 at 11:18 pm

I did it! I made a difference! Again!

with one comment

This post not only launched an awesome thread of its own, but also spawned a side-thread that yielded startling results too.

Part of the way down this second thread, I suddenly throw in…

Make A Show Of Yourselves was the page that had startled me with it’s adoption advocative language.

Immediately though, understanding entirely the point I was raising, Amanda was on to it …

And that, my friends, is another concrete achievement, because it’s the way we use the language that impacts adoptees far more than, for example, Sir Martin Narey appears to concede.

Written by 7rin

Mon, 18 March, 2013 at 12:08 pm

How much do people know?

with 6 comments

The following quotey bit is the question I asked over on the AAAFC General Discussion forum (on 26 February 2012). I’m re-posting the question here because I’m fed up with so many people going on about how they knew this adoptee who was oh so happy with being adopted, etc. Unfortunately, due to AAAfC being locked down from public viewing (not a complaint, just pointing out facts), a valuable discussion that could help educate others about the issue has been lost for linking to, and so I’m asking in here, and would appreciate any feedback given.

{quote}
I do wonder how many of the adoptees out there just lack the language available ’cause it’s not acknowledged by the general population (i.e. adoption fucks you up), rather than so many people being said by others to be “happy” with their adoptions.

Ok, this is that new post that sprung out of my head when I was finishing typing ^^that.

How many people know how you actually REALLY feel about adoption and all that it entails?

F’r instance, would your amom’s cousin describe you as “well our I’s adopted daughter’s turned out just fine, and isn’t at all bothered by her adoption”? Or does everyone that’s anyone know that “well, L’s daughter was adopted, but she’s entirely unhappy with the fact that it happened, and would counsel anyone contemplating the thought against it”?

Those of my families that’re on FB probably can’t help but be aware that I’m most definitely not a “happy adoptee”, given how much I post on the subject. Not sure how much the rest of my families know of my opinion on the issue. I don’t think amom’s cousin’d describe me as “happy with adoption” any more, but icbw.
{/quote}

I also know I’m not the only one who finds this habitual reaction to pretty much anything an adoptee says both irritating, and disempowering.

Written by 7rin

Wed, 6 February, 2013 at 4:34 am

Posted in RFD

Tagged with , ,

Surrogates & donor dads

with one comment

One of the many options in creating a child these days is that of surrogacy and donor sperm. This option – like adoption – is lauded as a valid and valuable way to “create a family”. Also similar to adoption, the kids that are created in this way are frequently described as gifts – thus negating their status as human beings, and instead consigning their existence to nothing more than a commodity to be handed over to their purchaser/s.

In accordance with adoptees, there are many donor conceived off-spring blogs springing up that echo the losses adoptees face, however, this post is less about those more usually expressed losses, and more to do with something that has been niggling me of late.

One of the posts over at the 7rin-on-adoption repository links to research that confirms the existence of cell migration from the embryo to the gestating carrier. While I don’t have links to research confirming that this happens in the other direction, I strongly suspect (based on my limited knowledge and massive assumptions) that this must happen – otherwise, where does the growing embryo attain its sustenance? Thus, I am concerned that articles exist suggesting that …

Gestational surrogacy is when a woman carries a baby to term for a couple. The gestational surrogate or carrier doesn’t donate her own egg, so she’s not biologically related to the child she carries. Rather, the egg and sperm come from the couple or from a donor egg and/or sperm.

… and that people can be believing this is a truthful synopsis of the situation.

Surely if the gestational carrier and the developing embryo share a symbiotic relationship, then the child that is later born – whether it originated from an egg produced by its carrier or otherwise – does have some genetic relationship with its carrier that is being readily dismissed as unworthy of mention and/or research?

I would appreciate any knowledgeable input on this subject as I admit, it is a subject I know very little about. However, I am concerned that these connections – as with the connections adoptees possess with their genealogical families – are being reduced and mitigated, perhaps in an effort to negate the importance of the nurturing role these carriers bear in order to further exploit women’s reproductive capabilities.

Written by 7rin

Sat, 2 February, 2013 at 4:16 pm

Posted in Questions

Tagged with , ,

Narey on Adoption

leave a comment »

Martin Narey answers some parents… but not the adoptees.


 

Embedded above, rewritten below by me (so any typos’re likely to be mine, and I apologise in advanced if I got any wrong – all corrections’ll be followable by any thread :p); originally pimped out on Twitter by Mr. Narey himself.

{quote}

This is an open letter to some people who use Twitter to challenge my views about adoption. Some of those people have written or e mailed me and have received replies (albeit often necessarily brief replies). Others have preferred to stay anonymous and that’s fine. Some who tweet and blog have been abusive. I don’t much like that but I understand it because I believe it reflects an anger and sometimes a helplessness about their individual cases. I would, I am sure, feel the same way were our positions reversed.

I have never denied the reality that sometimes children are taken into care unnecessarily. It would be silly to believe otherwise when we have a workforce that is fallible. But I believe, and all I have read and seen supports this, that we have a far greater number of cases where we leave children at home when they should be removed. My interest is in children who are neglected (I know that children are taken into care for other reasons). I believe that, as a society, we tolerate neglect for too long. We do not, as many people believe, have record numbers of children in care. At the end of the eighties the care population was half as big again as it is now. And that was at a time when there were at least three times as many adoptions.

So I believe the case for care, for intervening earlier to stop neglect and then sourcing a new permanence for a neglected child is overwhelming and of course I shall continue to argue for that.

Incidentally, I do not – as many tweeters suggest – profit in any way from adoptions. And Barnardo’s, which I ran for six years never, in all that time, made any profit or surplus from the very small number of adoptions they dealt with. Nor do I have any power to intervene in cases. So I cannon, even if I wished, help to achieve the return of anyone’s child.

My role is simply to offer a view to Ministers about adoptions. That view is based on my experience at Barnardo’s and, since my resignation, many, many days spent visiting local authorities, voluntary adoption agencies and speaking to adopters and the adopted as well as children in care and charities which support families struggling to keep their children. Some people call me the Adoption Czar, evoking an image of a large salary and a retinue of staff. Those things, like the Adoption Czar title, are inventions of the press. I have no staff and last year my total earnings from the Department for Education were about £40,000.

So what advice can I offer those who feel their children have been wrongly removed? It is this. Fight your case of course. But do not seek to do so by attacking adoption in general. Whatever the circumstances of your case it is demonstrably true that thousands and thousands of adoptions are successful. The number which breakdown are much lower than commonly believed (new research from the University of Bristol is likely to confirm this) and there are thousands of adult adoptees willing to speak positively about their experience. I am very close personally to four such adoptees and have met hundreds of others.

Nevertheless, I believe (and say frequently) that adoption is only appropriate for a small minority of the children taken into care in England, largely those neglected by parents who are unlikely ever to be able to be successful parents. It is indisputably right that for those children adoption brings stability and compensates for that neglect.

So, continue to pursue that which you believe in. But don’t undermine the specifics of your argument by ignoring the reality of neglect and the need for us as a society, when parents cannot be supported to offer decent homes (often because of drink and addictions) and if good quality kinship carers cannot be found, to find an alternative stability through adoption. Those who might advise that the way to seek resolution of your own cases is by seeking to undermine adoption are – at best – misguided. Instead I offer this advice sincerely, concentrate on demonstrating that the authorities have made grave mistakes in _your_ case

Kind regards

Martin Narey

{/quote}

Written by 7rin

Tue, 9 October, 2012 at 1:36 am

%d bloggers like this: