Blog-Gag-Me
Welcome to our new recurring column, Blog-Gag-Me. Readers have sent us (and we have happened upon) so many adoption blogs and blog entries that are offensive, dangerous set-ups for the children, unethical, illegal and/or crazy that it exceeds our FacePalm capacity. [Edited to add Child Collector and/or Red Flags]
Today, we feature ten entries.
One
Quiverfull family that has great disdain for biological family in a foster-care-type of situation.
Complete with prayers for themselves to parent.
http://pagefamilygrowinginlove.blogspot.com/
Check out June 2011 to February 2012 posts. They added a bio child and two foster children in the same month’s time.
Two
Expecting Something So Big From God.
Complete with “advocacy” for a child they call “Lucky.” Not so sure that is what I would call him if he is on this type of blog.
http://expectingsomethingsobigfromgod.blogspot.com/2012/02/lucky-needs-family.html
Three
Found Our Marbles.
Complete with disdain for birthparents visiting their disabled child in this Reece’s Rainbow adoption.
http://foundourmarbles.blogspot.com/2012/03/not-what-we-wanted-to-hear.html?m=0
Excerpt: “It has been a very emotional past couple of days. I received the news on Monday that Bogdan is not available for international adoption. 🙁 His parents are visiting him fairly regularly, and that is enough to make it so that he cannot be adopted. Apparently, a new law or regulation has been put into effect in the particular area of his region where parents can sign an irrevocable agreement with the state that guarantees his care by the state as long as the mom and dad visit.
I do not know if they are visiting solely because they want him to have care. I don’t know if they feel forced into it. I do not attempt to criticize them because I can only imagine what they are going through. Many times, parents are told this is the best for the child. There really are no support services for children with disabilities in those countries, so parents feel stuck. It isn’t always a case of rejection. Sometimes, they give up their children thinking they are doing the right thing. The knowledge that they are visiting him, for whatever reason, shows me that they do care about him. ”
Additionally, they “committed” to this child and a mere 13 DAYS later, they find out he is not available. They quickly move on to the next child.
Four
Proverbs Living-The Miracle of Adoption Check Is In the Mail.
Complete with condescension towards Ukrainian domestic adoptive family, hiring an investigator in Ukraine to track down the Ukrainian family (not even considering how intimidating that would be for the Ukrainian family), and lamenting of their “lost child” that was illegally “referred” to them.
http://proverbsliving.com/the-miracle-of-adoption-check-is-in-the-mail/
Excerpt: “You see, I want to make sure this Ukrainian family is in for the long haul. I want contact so that I can send photos of my family to theirs and compare the growth of our children. I want At-Large and his sister to know everything about each other. Thankfully, Ukraine’s law requires they know of each others whereabouts. Thankfully, I will have the right to share our lives.
But, if her family isn’t in this for the long haul, then I want her home with us. We’ve hired the investigator to make this known to the Ukrainian family. For her sake, I’m praying that this family is a loving, Christian home, with no intention of ever letting her go. Because if she has been living in a home that doesn’t truly want her, my heart will be broken even more than it already is, for her. And that my friends, will cause a fight. A fight for my baby girl that I touched and took photos of only for a brief few minutes. My baby girl that I fully expected to bring home within the next few months after meeting her the first time. My baby girl who was ripped from me by a bunch of bureaucratic b.s. and never given the opportunity to really know her older brother. My baby girl that stirs helpless emotion from all the family that longs for her, here.
This is such a touchy situation. Please pray that my girl, At-Large’s sister, is in her permanent home. A disruption of her current family would be devastating even if it would be a better family environment with us.”
Five
Cornish Adoption Journey-Brand New Adventure.
Complete with multiple special needs children, Reece’s Rainbow, new biological child and the “adventure” is that she will be homeschooling them. Nine children at age 30.
http://cornishadoptionjourney.blogspot.com/2012/02/brand-new-adventure.html
S
ix
Covenant Builders.
Complete with advocating for a 17 year old as part of a sibling group. Of course, the people adopting this sibling group are engaged in “giveaways” to fundraise, because once again, the people who want do not have the money to adopt.
http://covenantbuilders.blogspot.com/2012/03/marias-story.html?m=1#comment-form
S
even
Ellison Escapades.
Complete with CCCWA waiver for their special needs megafamily that will soon add #16 and #17 to the nine currently at home. She likes to refer to her family as a “gaggle of greatly loved goofballs.”
http://ellisonescapades.blogspot.com/
Eight
The Sorryls.
Complete with an ultrasound of Ethiopia, they are happy CCI Ethiopia clients.
http://www.thesorryls.blogspot.com/
Nine
Moments with Love
Complete with “taking the burden of ransom” away by advocating for a Ugandan orphan that had a previous adoption fall through and the “orphanage director has graciously allowed her to stay” in order to now be adopted.
http://momentswithlove.blogspot.com/2012/03/time-such-as-this.html
Ten
Bonkland.
Complete with disdain for biological cousin adopting “their” child.
http://morebonkiesplease.blogspot.ca/2012/03/update-lil-punkin.html?m=0
Excerpt: “I could write an entire series of posts on why we think biological connection is important, but not the trump card in decision making about a child’s entire future. But the reality is we are dealing with people who believe adoption is second rate and that a family’s skin color should always match no matter what the circumstances. You might guess that the daddy and I hugely disagree with that set of beliefs. Huuuuugely. For the record and as I have talked about on this blog…bio connections are important and we would be incredibly foolish not to recognize that. And there are plenty of cases where placing kiddos in their bio families is a wonderful decision. However…we do not believe that to be the case in every adoptive situation, nor do we agree with it in the case of Lil’ Punkin. ”
Someone sent me this link saying I should be outraged that my blog is being 'smacked' on. Quite honestly, I don't care :). My blog, Cornish Adoption Journey, tells about our life for friends. Yes, we're expecting a new baby, yep, we have a big family, and yes, we're young :). We do homeschool some of our children who have no 'place' in the school system… (which we did try, and I wish it worked because, well, wouldn't that make life easier?). Unfortunately, some of your facts are wrong because I'm no longer associated at all with the organization you have attached to my blog. And I'd say there's one other thing missing, which by the way this blog is intended to be rude and "bashing" people I think is probably another strike against us in this type of blog, however for us it's a big positive in our lives. We follow God's calling in everything we do, and He is faithful. That doesn't mean that we go blindly in to things or adopt with the expectation that "God will do it even when we can't." However it means that we don't jump on to a bandwagon as we have seen many times without not only a lot of thought and prayer and time considering exactly how it would work. Our children are all healthy, happy, are doing well physically and are developing at a good pace considering their challenges. They are well socialized, are cared for medically, and most importantly of all, they are well loved, have plenty of attention and have the love of a family and the support of a church, community, and extended family! We are so blessed to be able to be 30 year old parents of 9 children, many with special needs! Oh, and that bachelor's degree I have in education certainly helps out in the way of homeschooling my children :). I haven't checked out this blog past this post that was emailed to me by "concerned friends" that were so upset we were listed, however I thought I'd at least give you the rest of the story! I'm sure the rest of our family story is most likely just more to be 'cracked' on, but one of the parts of doing something that's outside of the social norms because you feel called to do it (and if I may say.. do it well!), we expect to have people question our ability to do what we do. If we weren't doing it every day, we might question someone else in their ability to do it as well! Thankfully, we also know other families that are successfully raising large special needs adoptive families and when we continue to trust and lean on God, we really can do it! Phil 4:13… James 1:27… Jer 29:11… those are all pretty good places to start in understanding us. But if those don't mean anything to you, then it's likely our family and our lives and our reasons for doing what we do will be taken in the same way. I hope you'll soon see the Blessings of adoption, rather than passing judgment on those of us that are living it all 🙂
These folks shipped the adopted kid off to boarding school but keep the bio kid at home to homeschool. The blog also seems to go on and on about the awfulness of the adopted kid in contrast to the lovely/pleasant/charming-ness of the bio lid:
http://trudgingahead.blogspot.ca/?m=0
How about you not comment about something you know nothing about? If you were a follower of their blog, you would have known better than to post this trash. SHAME ON YOU!!!
Not sure why my blog, Proverbs Living, is on your post "Blog-Gag-Me". Taking an excerpt from one of my posts and making it seem like our blog is "gag-worthy" is pathetic! I'm not going to explain myself or the details of our son and his sister's situation. However, I will say that you only have part of the story.
This family is adopting FOUR kids simultaneously with ZERO money, as they are trusting the Lord to provide. Because who wants to, um, demonstrate that you can afford to adopt/raise FOUR extra kids, plus the $100K to get them home:
http://alittleloveinyourheart.blogspot.ca/2012/02/betcha-didnt-see-this-coming.html
Wow, I have to say this is the first time I've visited your blog and I won't be making a repeat visit. All I have to say to you is, "Judgmental much????" and "Talk about unethical, skewing a tiny bit of information to make it fit your own viewpoint or needs." Blog Gag Me's include your own blog. Reform does need to happen, but bashing others doesn't need to be a part of it.
Ashley – Over-entitled to someone else's child much? I am sure you and your hubby would absolutely love it if a Ukrainian family paid a private investigator to keep track of your son, just in case you were abusing him or because they suspect you may only have adopted him for nefarious reasons and are likely to disrupt.
Are you really concerned for the kids, or do you just like to insult families who seek better lives for orphans? I mean, good gracious, they could be doing something awful like living lives for themselves, but rather they choose to open their homes to unwanted children. They are raising money for adoption…not a new luxury car or vacation. Rather than bashing and judging these families, why don't you go DO something to make a positive difference in the lives of the children? Go to the orphanages, offer aid, offer counseling to the biological parents (here and abroad).
Bloggers who are mad at Rally, this is Crabbina. Here are two helpful words: PASSWORD PROTECT.
You have every right in the world to blog, but if your blog is public, those who read your blog have every right to their opinions about it. If you can't take it, don't dish it to the public. You have CHOSEN to make your family's story known. No one is forcing you to share intimate details of your children's private lives. You only want the kudos and the gushing from your friends and/or like-minded "saviors" and can't seem to understand that some people in this world look at what you're doing with shock and not a little worry about what will become of your "forever families."
I probably reacted a bit emotionally in my first reply. I do appreciate the reform you are trying to bring to the adoption community, but I do think negative columns like bashing adoptive families are counterproductive to your goal. IMHO, you should rethink this column. It honestly brings down the credibility of your blog. Just my 2 cents, for what it's worth.
Anonymous 5:34 – So it is okay to pray for a BIOLOGICAL PARENT to stop visiting their beloved child? To spy on another family because they happen to have LEGALLY ADOPTED a kid you covet? That IT's totally acceptable to complain about the "unfairness" of custody of a kid you
covet (even if it is your a/child's sibling) BIOLOGICAL RELATIVE, who has been deemed capable of parenting their kin by a US JUDGE in a US COURT??
It's like the godly Christian folks who abuse/kill the kids they adopt (tons detailed on this website)? Who promise to be a forever family to said kid and then disrupt months or days later? (tons of examples here too — ma fave is this one though, mostly as lovely godly autumn Winkle has the temerity to justify kicking an institutionalized toddler to the curb after a few months cuz she didn't feel like dealing with the insurance company to get him a walker: http://noknots.blogspot.com/2011/10/story-you-have-been-waiting-for.html?m=1
Or this family that adopted 4 teens (several who were LEGALLY ADULTS, as the age of majority is 16 in Ukraine) and disrupted 3 inside 6 months.including one within all of 35 (!!!!!) days. Yup, that really is living up to your commitment:
http://followinghiscall.wordpress.com/2012/02/13/taken-hostage-or-testing-our-love/
Or this family that takes bio kids to Orlando and leaves the adopted kid at home. Tells the adopted kid she's not going to Disney or Universal because mom and bio siblings must "recuperate" from dealing with her. And mom can't understand why a/kid is upset about it:
http://ourhaitianjourney.blogspot.ca/2012/03/orlando-its-time.html?m=0
I keep hoping these people will step back and reevaluate what it is they are doing instead of getting defensive. Maybe they could do a 180 and end up in your Kudos column…maybe that is asking too much, but you never know!
Ahhh…people are talking. This is good. I will start by replying to the 6:29 comment and work my way up.
6:29, I am not sure which other commment is yours as most have posted anonymously and I will not assume to know which it is. That should be lesson one for all commenters, you should not assume anything about your hosts, especially if you have not seen what we report about on this blog.
Regarding "negative columns bashing adoptive families": First and foremost, these are blogs that have greatly offended our readers. GREATLY OFFENDED. We are happy to give voice to our readers. If you read the intro, it also can and does include posts that have unethical and illegal things in them-illegal things can include gaming without a license. That is against the law. Gaming as fundraising is on the uptick and is in one of the blogs we name. I actually state that in the description. Have another read of it. Unethical includes faux referrals from Ukraine (and it is illegal too). Photolisting is unethical. That is another blog we mention.
I also mention in the intro dangerous placements.Now what do I mean by that? I mean HIGH RISK.I will try to connect the dots for you from this column and the two columns that follow and our 9 points of reform. The column that follows is the tally of foster care abuse. The one after that is the tally of international adoption disruptions.
In order to want to reform something, you first need to know what is wrong. We have identified 9 things and put a graphic on the home page, right column. Each post touches on one or more aspects of these 9 things. Abuse and disruption are two very big problems in postplacement-these increase in HIGH RISK situations. We have put together an ethics package of our posts to explain how to prevent it. A big way to prevent things is to screen out people in homestudies. Well, what things should go into screening people out so abuse and disruption does not occur? Essentially, we are in progress of creating a profile/profiles of BEHAVIORS to screen out. We have found that there are in fact several profiles and components that are contributing to abuse and disruption. These are things such as placing unrelated children together at the same time and many placements in a short time frame, adopting from countries that are in the midst of SERIOUS ethical flaws (like Uganda which is in another blog we mention).
We also deeply care about adoptees-your hosts are adoptive parents. We CRINGE when we see the specifics of adoptees' lives splattered across the internet for ANYONE (including foreign placing countries) to see. Kids are savvy these days. They WILL find this info. Maybe you believe that they will LOVE YOU for posting all of this, but please step back and use some common sense. So, as with everything we post (including our facepalms and Wednesday Weirdness columns, there is always a thread that connects-AND IT ISN'T COLORED RED)
Crabbina, You always say the right thing. Sending a virtual cocktail your way.
5:34,Am I concerned for the kids? YES, I can emphatically state. First read my 9:34 comment and then, seriously, take a look at our 340+ how could you cases. Just spend 5 minutes perusing them. If you are a person of faith, pray for them. If 5 minutes in our archive does not make you seethingly angry, then I don't know what will.
As for "unwanted children", please take a moment to consider that children in orphanages often have family members alive who are too poor to provide medical care. It really is demeaning to tag these children with the "unwanted" label. In fact, a few of the blogs in this very post mention biological family members stepping up to the plate to parent and in both blogs-one a US foster parent and the other an IA parent-they show great disdain for the biological family members. Again, what if the adoptee ever reads that?
Fundraising: for some countries, this is ILLEGAL. Ethiopia is one of them. Secondly, as I said in my 9:34 comment, gaming fundraisers are popping up and are ILLEGAL. Lastly, gathering money prior to beginning an adoption is called planning and is important. Gathering money AFTER you committed to a child or knowingly accepting referrals without a clue of where money will come from puts the child at HIGH RISK. Please look at our disruption summary post to see the serious mental health conditions that many children have (insurance doesn't cover the treatment) and look to our abuse post to see that the CDC reported that abuse and neglect can cost over $200,000 of lifetime costs. That will be born by APs or society.
I don't understand the comment about being a counselor. I for one would like licensed, trained people ONLY to counsel. I am not a counselor. As for the other two bits about orphanages and giving aid, HOW DARE YOU assume that your hosts don't do that. That is extremely insulting and to come on my blog and tell me this is PIGGISH. Yet, I allowed you to say it, now didn't I?
4:34, great points.
3:56, this is the first time on my blog of 1000+ posts and you won't make a repeat visit. I guess you know it all then. Congrats.
"Judgmental much?" YES, I can emphatically state. At risk children and orphans NEED to have people JUDGE whether their placements will be safe and good. Since you won't be looking at our other posts, you won't understand the disruptions and abuse that go on in the midst of supposed judgment(homestudy) and international placement or nonfamily placement need. There is grave corruption when it comes to identifying which kids will be placed and agencies are rubberstamping homestudies and placing kids in high risk situations (see my other 2 comments about this)
Again, with the "bashing" and "skewing", you need to be specific-I take it you don't know anything about the current situation in Uganda, the agency CCI, what types of fundraising are actually illegal and what a faux Ukraine referral is.
I am sick of APs BASHING biological family members who step up to parent. I FEEL sick when I think about the adoptee reading that on any kind of forum or blog.
So, yes JUDGING what is wrong and WHO is wrong is an important part of reform.
2:43, wow, that is a high risk situation. Thank you for sharing
Ashley, if you choose to read my other comments, you may understand why it was selected. Maybe not and that is ok.
10:43, thank you for sharing. That is painful to read. I am concerned for the adoptee who may find that some day.
Meredith, I didn't say that you are currently attached to Reece's, I just said the name Reece's. But truly, aren't we all connected to the organizations that we use to adopt whether we want to be or not. When something goes awry in the organization that we use to adopt, does it not reflect on our adoptions (I include myself here)? Well when there are public blogs by APs, whether we want to or not, it does reflect on all of us APs, so when adoptees and others come to us and are very angry about what they read on AP blogs, we can ignore them (not my style), defend the AP (I can't do that) or stand with the adoptee. We choose to stand with the adoptee as it is quite simple. They are correct.
Again you say you haven't read the blog. I invite you now to look at it. You may understand where we are coming from.We don't post these things to get our jollies. Read my comment 9:34 that explains what we do in depth
Last but not least 9:25, you were posting at the same time as me:Thanks for that comment. I also hope for that. If I didn't have hope, I wouldn't be doing this. If they do not reevaluate, then what they are doing can cause shutdowns.
Rally, I need a better explanation from you as to why my blog is on here. I can understand what you "think" is going on and if we were, in fact, bullying this Ukrainian family then of course – GAG ME! But we're not. It is called a biological family search. We are complying with Ukraine law and asking our son's biological family to do the same. We were told by a Ukrainian lawyer that it is possible that our son's sister's family "adopted" her to receive money from the government. Ukrainian adoptions are often more like our foster care situations. We are simply asking what their intentions are attempting to establish a relationship so that my son will know where his bio sister is and vice versa. You failed to mention how we are praying that this Ukrainian family intends to raise her permanently. You failed to mention that we are praying that she isn't disrupted. You failed to mention that we only want a chance to adopt her If (HUGE IF) the Ukrainian family has no intention of raising her permanently, in their home.
Please explain why I'm in the wrong here. Please explain why my son shouldn't know his sister. Please explain why our son's sister shouldn't know of her brother. Please explain why it is bad to ask the Ukrainian family (not biological family) to comply with Ukraine's laws when we've offered all of our personal information to them, that is reasonable to offer.
I really want to understand this.
This family adopted 2 SN kids from Ukraine in 1 year (incurring $30K debt and stating on their blog that they CANNOT afford to adopt again AND repay that loan) and just committed to adopt a THIRD SN kid that they cannot afford to adopt:
http://luckytolovelyla.blogspot.ca/2012/03/dear-lyla.html
Who on earth signs off on these homestudies?
And another illegal gaming fundraiser:
http://www.wearespeechless.blogspot.ca/2012/03/ipad-update.html
USCIS, every so often, seems to make a good call. Like that a family with 8 SN kids MAYBE should not be adopted FIVE MORE SN kids SIMULTANEOUSLY:
http://godsrainbowsinourlives.blogspot.ca/2012/03/where-we-are-with-uscis.html
I am 5:34 and 6:29. Thank you for your lengthy reply (I sincerely mean it). I will have to take more time to read through your site, and see what you your suggestions are to bring reform to adoption. I apologize for being judgmental on what I perceived as your judgmental-ism, and for suggesting you (or followers of this blog) offer aid (I didn't say that you didn't offer aid, just suggested it); and of course only licensed counselors should counsel. But I still hold to my opinion that this column is out of taste with the rest of your website. Just my thoughts. I know there needs to be reform and the approval process possibly tightened up more. Of course I wish that there was never a need for adoption, that biological families would be fit and able to care for their children. Maybe I need to read through your website, but do you highlight adoptions gone well? If you don't have that already, perhaps you could do that, too? Also, about photolistings – do you think it's wrong for the foster system (adoptuskids) to photolist? Just curious. Thanks!
Regardless of the legalities, moral implications, or 'craziness' involved in the above cases, a defamatory and ill-communicated blog post does nothing to further the legitimacy and authenticity of your organization and your mission.
To be honest, like one of the commentators stated above, this type of aggressive encounter–as opposed to concern and education–makes me very reluctant to refer to your blog in the future as a reliable resource.
A more professional approach may serve you better in the future. If you, or your readers, have concerns regarding the safety, health, or legality of a child's presence in a family, it would behoove you to contact the appropriate authority–not the Internet at large.
I am new to the world of adoption. In January, one of my FB friends adopted a little girl from China. I was fascinated by her blog. I actually thought that her inclusion of an adoption timeline was original. Then, I started watching gotcha day clips on YouTube. I was sincerely touched by the crowds of orphanage staff members lining up to hand babies to their forever families. I spent hours watching every gotcha day clip I could find. Then I began to have doubts. After a while, these gotcha days all start to look too similar- a bit like a factory line. The cliched photos of the babies lined up on the red couch in the White Swan was the breaking point to my ignorant perception of adoption as a noble act. The babies became too much like a mass produced product. I began to visit blogs of the people who posted the gotcha day videos. They ALL have adoption timelines. I stumbled upon blogs of women with 12, 14, 39 children! Many adopted, many special needs. I began to question- how do they afford this? (I live in Ireland, where "tax breaks" are not so popular.) Not just affording moneywise, but timewise, attentionwise? How DO they hoemeschool?I found Reece's Rainbow and cried over the photos of children who were collected in groups, to move to crowded homes in the US. How can you do all that can be done for one special needs child, much less 3 or more? Then I found pound puppy legacy and this site. Once your eyes are opened…they get money for each child! They homeschool so they do not have to get the kids ready in the morning, so the teachers do not question the child's dirtiness and malnutrition! They take retreats with 90 other women to Florida. HOW can this happen? How can they not see that if you have that many children, your home is an institution! If a child has RAD, they are not a villain. Maybe that child would be better off in their homeland. Maybe that other child would be better off with a family with only one other child. Maybe mega moms should spend less time blogging and more time with the 22,37, children!
Irish anonymous again- Some nights, I lie in bed awake and wonder, "Have I spent enough time reading to the children today? Did we do arts and crafts lately? Have I listened enough? Should we bake more often? Are the sheets clean on the children's beds? Are their nails grubby? Was the food healthy enough today? Do we need more vitamins? Was I correct in correcting their mannners?" What do the mega- moms wonder, "Did I change number 26's diaper? Did 22 get his meds? Does number 3 have a dentist appointment? Has 37 eaten anything today? Was 11 hours on the nintendo ds to much for autistic number 4?" What will happen to these kids in the future? State run nursing homes, I expect. It does look beautiful to have eight children under age 12 all around the dinner table, but what about when they are hulking, sulky, spotty, hormonal teens? What about when that cuddly-bown-eyed-beauty-who-is-10-but-looks-five-because -before-being-adopted-she-spent-four-malnurished-years-in-a-cot-with-CP-and-autism turns 16 and is too heavy to lift? Sometimes, I worry that I have not spent enough time with the DOG, and I have noticed mega moms collecting dogs. I guess the 24 plus kids take responsibility. Maybe if your mom is too busy changing the diapers of 11 other children, some of whom will never be toilet trained, then you are happy to get some attention/ affection from the dogs. Also, I noticed one writer on this page has posted painfully apt messages on some mega-moms blogs, but they were totally deflected by other mega-moms delusional statements of support. People need to ask themselves, "Just because I feel tempted to take this child home, should I do it? Is this impulse from God, or from my ego? Can I really be the best person to meet this child's exceptional needs, or should I allow someone without 12 plus other kids a chance? Am I qualified to teach 14 kids of varying ages and abilities, or should I let the kids have a break from family life to attend school, where teachers are usually qualified and (to some degree) monitored? Can I be everything to everyone?"
ourhaitianjouretblogspot.com, is titled mom to 16, but she states in the profile that she is mother to 15 wonderful children. One possibly-not-as-wonderful daughter has been sent into foster care after making embarrassing allegations about the Dad. This is the daughter who did not get to go to Disney with the bio kids
I have spent a lot of time reading "Reece's Rainbow". At first, I found it very admirable. However, having read through many of the blogs of the families who have adopted, or are in the process of adopting, children listed on the site, I now find it alarming. It seems that if one craves admiration, the thing to do is adopt the most special, most medically and developmentally challenged child from the most deprived institution, then brag about it on a blog. Lots of people will reply, praising you to God. All the more if you have many children at home. Extra kudos if you can't actually afford the process, or the parenting. Extra extra kudos if you write nice things on the responder's blog, who amazingly enough (Praise Jesus) have ten or so adopted special needs home- schooled children with RAD as well. Most frighteningly, some mothers thank the Lord for the chance to save the child to raise them in a counntry where Jesus is the Saviour- what if that child would have preferred to become a Muslim, or Jewish, or Wicca? What if they would have preferred to stay in their own country, even if they are poor forever? What if they would prefer NOT to come home with you, be coerced into baptism, be forced to babysit a multitude of siblings, before being diagnosed with RAD, heavily medicated, then shipped off to a foster home?
I read two disturbing blogs lately. In one, a mother of 16plus children accessed info. about two SN children in Bulgaria, from a website that has detailed photolistings. She received funds and went to Bulgaria to meet the children. She met one "Maria" and the child was delightful, so she decided to proceed with the adoption. She met the other "Maria" and was initially impressed, but on the second day the child misbehaved. The mother felt that this behaviour did not mean that the child was unadoptable, but that it did mean she would not be a member of HER family. I hope to God that this woman was not introduced to the child as MAMA, which you often see happening in gotcha videos. So the mother came back to the US to finalise the one adoption, but then decided since her paperwork was already approved, to adopt an even more special needs girl, from such a deprived orphanage that to adopt from there seems to carry an extra cache.
Ashley, on your blog, referring to adoption, it actually states, "no money, no problem!" Do you think this is responsible?
Thank you again to everyone who is joining this conversation including those that do not like this blog or blog post. I will respond to each one of you in multiple comments.
First, thanks to the shared extra blogs from anonymous Mar 22 10;12, 10:30, 10:39 and Mar 23 633 and 855 AM. We really do appreciate your diligence in bringing this to the forefront. It is something that the adoption community and general public really need to be aware of.
Next,I will respond to earliest new comments to the latest.
Ashley, thanks for asking. We do appreciate it as our goal with this provocative column is to bring awareness AND talk through and educate PAPs, APs and the general public. We KNOW that this is provocative and I will touch on that more when I respond to Larissa, but with the Number Four ,I mentioned 3 things in your listing. The first one-condescension to biological family-is the main reason. We all need to make assumptions when we make decisions, but we have seen much too often, as in your particular post, that there is an assumption in place that the biological family has no intention of this placement being permanent to the extent that you feel the need to pray for it. So it is the assumption and *how* it is being said that has triggered multiple people to be offended.Part of what we want to bring awareness to is that governments, adult adoptees, general public and even the minor adoptee are the *actual* audience of a public blog EVEN IF the intention of the blogger is to talk with family and friends. You see, many blogs like yours are in blogrolls and forums and that expands the readership. It has a ripple effect that is not positive. As a community, we all just need to be aware.
We completely understand and agree that siblings should communicate and know each other. That was not an issue, it was the "tracking down" part in *combination with* expressing that the biological placement would not be permanent that we found to be intimidating. Placing ourselves in the shoes of a biological family that is encountered by an investigator and possibly a lawyer? sounds intimidating.We do understand that there is a requirement to find and communicate with the sibling. In your 2nd response, you mention that the "lawyer" felt it wasn't permanent. It has been our experience over our collective 30+ experience-years in adoptionland that facilitators and foreign lawyers are not always truthful when they speak to clients about intentions of biological families as…there is no easy way to say this…but they don't want to muddy the waters or lose business, current or future. Frankly, biological families are BARRIERS to their business and even though so many facilitators are caring people, it is in fact a business. It is distasteful that there is this mixed feeling on facilitators, but that is our experience.
We also want to bring awareness to a practice that has been engaged for years in Ukraine and that is giving "referrals" when the legal process really is not to predefine children. We are concerned that country will shut down soon because of this.
So, to sum up, your blog was red-flagged. We don't think you are a bad person and we appreciate you engaging in conversation with us.
Anonymous 4:05, thank you again for responding.I respect your opinion even if it is not the same as mine. This column is a hit to the gut, maybe a double hit or 10 hits since I posted 10 things. I GET that. So I ask for a moment that you put yourself in the shoes of the general public who stumble onto these 10 blogs. Can you imagine that those blogs and what we highlighted might be a hit to the gut for them? Some people have no problem with posting mean things on people's private blogs-we don't do that. Some blogs do not allow any comment that is not praiseworthy (and I have to say that one columnist Andrea Poe who we take jibes at on this blog disallows comments negative to her view even if they are completely in line with TOS)There are not many places that have an outlet for those to express themselves against this type of thing.
Reform is a complicated mess because we are trying to retrofit systems that were so poorly designed to begin with. We really think that the US foster care system needs to be completely disassembled and child welfare completely re-thought. International adoption in many ways needs to have some foundational changes in preparation, establishment of new programs and how agencies are allowed to operate.
As for adoptions gone well, simply put…we care about outcomes. If the outcomes of the adoption are good, they don't need reform. We are truly happy for every single adoption that turns out well and frankly it amazes us that many do even though the system is a wreck. Here is the complication about highlighting "good" adoptions. If the child is a minor still, we actually cannot say that the outcome is "good". Unfortunately, we just got done summarizing our disruption data and 42 of 121 (roughly 1/3 that we can identify disrupted 2 or more years later. We find that most bloggers or news stories tell the story of a family 1 year or so postadoption. We have covered many cases in our How Could You? archive in which abuse is years after placement. We have a column from Feb 2012 that gives a followup of a family praised in media and adoption support circles for YEARs that is devastating and eye-opening See http://reformtalk.blogspot.com/2012/02/tale-of-dunham-megafamily.html This is why we don't highlight these so-called "good" stories-they are stories in progress.
Photolisting in foster care: I don't like it. We have highlighted in our Facepalm series several types of these situations. One was a place where photos were distributed and I think put up in Taco Bells, another where photos were posted in library and another ina children's museum. I do not think that is appopriate and I cringe when I think these "mugshots" are on a wall in a fast food place like the America's Most Wanted list. I would MUCH rather have the CHILDREN pick the family as many times as possible (obviously small kids couldnt' do that) and seeing that most kids in foster care are older, I think for MANY that could work. Instead of fairs in which foster parents "pick" the kid, how about the other way around?
Last but not least, a good summary of some of our views on reform can be read at http://reformtalk.blogspot.com/2011/09/lets-get-real-adoption-reform.html
Larissa,you are entitled to your opinion of defamatory and that is fine. As for ill-communicated, this post is getting a ton of hits and that is what this is about-bringing awareness. So, maybe this post doesn't achieve YOUR agenda, but it is tying in to MY agenda of awareness and looping the general public into this fight. There are not enough of us adoption reformers to FORCE, yes FORCE the changes. It is purposefully provocative and yes, thanks for noting that it stands out from our other posts. Mission accomplished! Seriously, we don't go to people's personal blogs and post on them. As I mentioned in a comment above, these blogs have negative ripple effects on the community and encourage unprepared PAPs to adopt. We cannot even express to you how many cases that we know about that are *devastating* due to activities like those on these blogs are engaging in.THOSE that are devastated are TOO DEVASTATED to speak out and THAT is what the industry WANTS, so they can continue unchecked. Well NOW the industry is going to face day by day hits by us.
As for aggressive,I take it that you feel aggressive is a negative thing? I do not. Sitting around schmoozing with adoption agency personnel, talking oh-so-civilly, in academic conferences has not really achieved the level of reforms or even *steps* in reforms needed. Painful, but true. Hague regulations-written by the industry.Though there was a comment period for the public, it was those with the big bucks that rammed lightweight regulations through. FFOA initiative?-industry run. That failed, so the tactic was to switch to The Way Forward Project. See http://reformtalk.blogspot.com/2011/11/halloween-was-last-week-but-this-week.html
Our government and adoption industry are engaging in some scary stuff and stay tuned for April when we expose some more…
Milquetoast manuevers aren't cutting it. If you are interested in reform, I encourage you to get involved with it and create your own path if you don't like our path or other organizations paths.The more, the merrier.
Lastly, about contacting CPS on bloggers. Whoa! Even though it may seem that our intent is to hurt families, it is quite the opposite. This tough love doesn't look pretty. Our experience tells us that we cannot sit by and enable, yet CPS is not exactly trustworthy. Look to our foster care reform posts and how could you cases. I think of all child welfare groups, they are the least to be trusted.
Anonymous from Ireland, Welcome! You have done some GREAT research. It is breathtaking to read all of that, isn't it? We ALL start out naive when we go into adoption.*I* was dumber than a box of rocks on all issues when I started. The stupid things I would say! I even used the term paper pregnant. (Facepalm to myself.) The key is learning and not repeating the things when you were naive. I always tell people to research at least 6 months and read ALL of the bad stuff you can find, line up postplacement help, save money first, then adopt, space your kids, expect the worst, stay connected postadoption.
You have hit on a very important issue that is at the heart of this blog and that is *how* adoption is MARKETED. It is full of lies and deceives people into thinking that there are *different* needs than the actual needs. Of course there are orphans. Of course institutionalization is devastating for a child. Of course children should be loved and cared for, medically-attended to, educated etc. Adoption is one of the slate of options that works for kids. We would like every single child at risk to be individually evaluated when they are in out-of-home care and have the best scenario decided for EACH child. We want children that are being adopted to actually be PREPARED to enter a family if that is new for them.
You are spot-on correct about the relationship with lots of animals and the children. We see this repeatedly.
I really agree with your observations on the quality of the individual homeschooling needs of the special needs child when they are in the megafamily as well.
Yet another illegal gaming as adoption fundraiser blog:
http://babynumber10.blogspot.ca/2012/03/meet-jolly-family.html
The charming beneficiary of this ipad3 lottery didn't even have the funds to complete a HOMESTUDY when they faux "committed" to the Ukrainian orphan.
Rally, the family that took our son's sister in is NOT the biological family! Therefore there is no condescension toward the biological family! Period. We are actively seeking to establish a relationship with the sister's family and also, separately, the children's biological family. So yet again, I do not understand why my blog is featured on your post.
We are seeking to establish a relationship with the sister's family because we desire our son to have a relationship with his biological sister. We also would like to know their intentions with her- being a permanent or not permanent home because after inquiring through the Ukrainian courts to receive the appropriate records that would legally allow us to establish a relationship with the sister, it appears as though the family is possibly receiving money to "foster" our son's sister. It also sets negatively that this family took in our son's sister even though the orphanage director told this family that we were in the process of filing a letter of intention to the State Department of Adoption in regards to our son's sister.
I'm so frustrated that you would associate our situation with some of the most negative and horrible characteristics of adoption. In all honesty, we are doing what we are doing for our son to be able to reconnect with his sister. And if in the process it is discovered that this family has taken her in only for the money (I'm hoping and praying they are permanent family for her) then all I'm asking is for the opportunity to bring her into our family- which would be permanent. A home that wouldn't be accepting money to have her. Of course, this isn't our first choice because that would mean a disruption would occur. This scenario isn't ideal or healthy and again, we are hopeful that it doesn't happen this way.
Anonymous, if you take the paragraph header as literal then of course, it is irresponsible. But I bet you take the title of this post "Blog-Gag-Me" as literal? … I personally, see nothing wrong with saving and fundraising during the adoption as long as you do not commit to a referral without having a "plan b" for your money resource in the event the fundraising or saving comes up short. A "Plan b" could be things like- existing savings, investments, loans, liquidating assets, etc. I wrote "No money, no problem" assuming that most people officially begin the adoption process by solving the majority of the money issue. As in, game planning where the money would come from as the FIRST step in beginning an adoption.
PAP works for Holt Adoptions explaning why spending $20K on family preservation in say, Ukraine, is a BAD idea, i.e. that $20K would be waaaaay better spent getting an American to just ADOPT said kid:
“Through my work with Special Angels Adoption, I have seen lots and lots of adoption situations. It is very rare that a situation is purely a simple economic problem. I totally agree that when possible, loving birth families should be kept together and there should be programs to encourage such. One great agency that has awesome programs you can donate to in order to keep biological families together internationally is Holt. But even though these programs are great and should be supported, there are children who cannot stay with their biological families for more reasons then just money. The problems are much more complicated then that”
http://www.extra-chromosomes.blogspot.ca/2012/03/question-15-wouldnt-tons-of-money-spent.html
PAP told that “the judge would never allow a family of our size to adopt him”… but is nonetheless .fundraising to TRY to adopt this child. (Family appears to have 7 kids under the age of 5 and hopes to another high-needs, special needs child):
http://www.farleykids.blogspot.ca/2012/03/prayers-please.html
The ever popular PAP pining for a kid that is not legally available for adoption (extra bonus points as they’ve plastered photos of the unadoptable kid all over their blog). The whining of the “how dare they shut down adoptions just because some American abused their adopted child” is just the icing on the cake:
http://bringingcalebhome-now.blogspot.ca/2012/02/bad-news.html
Yet another faux referral of a Ukrainian orphan (with lots of illegal photos too):
http://rescuingvictoria.blogspot.ca/2012/03/you-are-chosen.html
PAP is struggling to pay for medical care for 2 of her very ill adopted SN children… but nonetheless hoping to adopt 2 more high-needs SN kids (without any of the $$ to do so):
http://www.nachalaadopt.blogspot.ca/2012/03/chrissie-medical-and-rain.html
Ashley – You say that the orphanage director told the Ukrainian family that you were "in the process of filing a letter of intention" with the SDA — indicating said letter had NOT YET BEEN FILED. So, according to you, the Ukrainian family that is caring for Your Son's BioSister committed the HORRIBLE SIN of taking in a girl that OFFICIALLY and on the record DID NOT have a family? So it'd be preferable for the Ukrainian family to have left BioSister there on the off chance that maybe possibly at an indeterminately later date a letter of intention might be filed?
In terms of $$ to adopt: Responsible people save up ahead of time, be it for a bio kid or an adoption. I know many a family with great health insurance in the US that saved up a good $20K ahead of having a biological child, i.e. enough to cover insurance deductibles and 6 months parental leave (so 1 parent can stay home with the new baby). These families are obviously not entitled to the cushy $13K adoption tax deduction either. Is it really that unreasonable to expect PAPs to undertake similar preparations AHEAD of an adoption? With the tax refund, the PAP family would likely only need to save up, say, $10K to cover the entire cost.
Get a life.
Thank you for your response. I tend to agree that you are always associated with something which you've once been in contact with, especially to the degree of which I was involved in the organization. That said, I have made an intentional attempt to disassociate myself from the organization, therefore my comment noting that I'm no longer connected to them.
I would disagree that this qualifies a family to be judged, however, simply because of the organization they associated with during their adoption :). If they are unprepared, taking on something they don't understand, KNOWINGLY disobeying the laws of the country or KNOWINGLY associating with a corrupt organization or agency, then by all means they have chosen that path.
That said, I find that your way of judging families without their knowledge, of pointing them out as 'gag me' blogs because of associations with organizations, or otherwise criticizing families which appears to be simply because you don't agree with their age/family dynamic/religion…? to be discrediting at a minimum.
My guess is that many of these families don't even know that they are posted here unless they have someone else that happens to read here and alerted them (I wouldn’t be). It appears to me that this blog is not an honest attempt to raise awareness, but much more geared toward anonymous people posting to trash others. If you think that this is really an attempt to help families "see your side", I would suggest a way that reaches out these families and offers support to them rather than to publicly post them as people who are "obviously doing something illegal or immoral". If you want to be constructive, as you've said, I think this would be much better done through listing out the injustices you see happening without calling out specific families that you feel fit those profiles. Why not email your posts that explain your concerns to the blog authors rather than publicly bashing?
I hope and pray that you will see that adoption IS a blessing!
Do I care that you posted us here? Not really. People who don't know or understand us will of course criticize us. Those who have been in our home and with our family and children know very well how our family WORKS and tries to glorify God in everything we do, including "doing right" by all of our children :).
I also pray that if you truly desire to be a constructive website that is a resource to parents and potential parents that you will consider the negative effect that this type of "blog bashing" will bring. There are so many other angles (that perhaps you are already taking… I don't know, but this IMHO discredits any other attempts) to take that would go far above this type of behavior and instead be constructive. Of course, that likely won't have the same effect on your "blog hits" (as you've mentioned) as a negative post such as this does…
I hope and pray that you will see that adoption IS a blessing!
NOTE: Blog owner Rally is the ultimate multitasking energizer bunny and is unfortunately going to be unavailable most of this week. Crabbina and I are guest bloggers and will approve comments that do not violate the blog TOS when we can, but we cannot promise responses to all in a timely fashion.
Some things I will address very quickly for readers:
This is an AP led blog. Not adoptee, although we frequently have adoptee readers who send us things to address. It is important to note because we have heard people call this an angry adoptee blog. The blog is coming from an AP perspective and we do not pretend to speak for adoptees or any other groups or even all APs.
As such it goes beyond saying we love our children very much, but would not go so far as to call adoption a blessing. The children are a blessing, not adoption.
Someone said something about this being an organization, sorry I am trying to post quickly and don't remember who. It is not. It is just a blog (but a very good and important one *wink*).
The blog receives a lot of mail and various items people would like addressed. However, know we do not post anything that is not in the public realm already.
Let's keep the dialogue going and please go past this blog entry and read what else this blog has to offer as there is a ton of good stuff here!
There we differ. Adoption is a blessing to me. I am blessed that I am able to parent the children that God's given me through adoption. It is also a blessing to my children, that have families now because of the blessing of adoption. My children are ABSOLUTELY blessings, I will not argue there :). And I am blessed by their presence in my life. I (as an adoptive parent) am not the blessing… I am a recipient of a wonderful gift :).
Meredith – This is Crabbina. Thank you very much for posting. However, I said it before and I will say it again: If people do not want to be criticized for their blogs, then please do not make them publicly available for strangers to read and for their children to someday find and read. It is so easy to password protect a blog and then tell your friends and family to contact you if they want to read it.
And I honestly don't understand how you can claim that this blog is "not an honest attempt to raise awareness." Would you be kind enough to explain?
Perhaps you haven't had the time or inclination to read more of the entries (which is understandable), but this blog was set up by Rally and Reformatina and myself precisely to raise awareness of all that can go wrong (and right) with adoptions. The fact that there have been so many hits on this site show that some people are interested in the How Could You's and abuse of children that for too long has been shoved into the dark corners of "Gotcha Days" (a term we all loathe) and Forever Family Land (another crock for any child who was disrupted). There are plenty of PAPs and APs who who would never knowingly sanction criminal activity in their own household or workplace or house of worship yet who sanction and/or deny the trafficking, baby-stealing, bribery, corruption, or whatever else it takes to get them the kid they want, ethics be damned. Do you think this is right?
You may disagree, but frankly these people make me sick at heart on behalf of their voiceless and powerless children. Awareness needs to be raised to expose them and stop the madness before the adoption business gets worse than it is already.
Hi Crabbina,
I don't know you (or even a real name…), you don't know me, but I think we may be surprised how similar our viewpoint on adoption really is when it comes down to orphan care, coercive practices that are used to support the adoption business, and corruption within the industry.
To respond to your comments:
I have no qualm with the idea that doing ANYTHING publicly, opens oneself to criticism. My response was simply that this post, and others like it (I understand from the previous author's posting that this isn't a one time post) are not constructive. A post such as this does not appear to be an attempt to raise awareness, but more so derogatory statements simply because people have chosen to be public in their family life and adoption.
I have said that I don't mind being listed, because we recognize that opening to the public eye brings scrutiny and others will not understand us. The reason we don't password protect? It's because our own family life and openness is intended to raise awareness. Awareness of the need for adoption, awareness of disability in general, awareness of all sorts of other things that we come across and write about… mostly, though, it's about how others can get through some of the obstacles of life that we have or are walking through such as navigating certain medical things or the school system, etc. That, and pictures and updates for our families and friends that just want to keep up with the happenings of our family.
I think you have said it well when you say you've set it up to show all that goes wrong (and right) with adoptions… and you are correct I haven't investigated the site. I'm guessing you've not likely visited my family blog either, and that is fine. I do have 8 children and am a busy mom, so aside from subscribing to follow up comments to see replies to mine, I haven't read further than this post. This post, in its entirity, is trying to show what is wrong with adoption, and is not helpful in making things better. It is set up only to show people what you, or someone else, have deemed "bad" situations. How does that raise awareness or provide anything constructive to anyone?
The post about my own blog, minus the association with an organization we don't support, is something I likely would have written as my own profile… doesn't bother me one bit :).
I totally disagree with the illegal things that go on in adoptions, and in fact have separated myself as far as possible from some organizations because of the idea of "go to any length" to get a child out. My own personal viewpoint of adoption is that when there is a legal way to do something, that is BY ALL MEANS the way to do it. The reason I say "when" is because in child sex trade, etc… sometimes the answer may be to go in and steal the children back out… however let's not leave the subject at hand.
Where is the constructive part of this blog post?
I believe that many megam moma post public blogs in the hope of getting a book published. I viewed one of the blogs listed here, involving a mother who hopes to adopt two chidren with CF. I wonder if she knows that children with CF are not supposed to be housed together, as doing so poses further risks to their health.
Do you have ANYTHING better to do??? You are pathetic! These people are adopting CHILDREN that will die in their home country. And YOU are sitting around bashing them!
You might have said some rude things about each family but you know what? You just gave each family more publisity for their fundraisers so thank you for that 🙂
The self-taught adoptive "trauma mamas" — the ones who take bio kids to Disney for "conferences" while leaving the adopted kids at home — have some pretty strange ideas about parenting, bc they know soooooo much better than anyone and everyone else, including teachers with masters and social work degrees and tons of experience working with traumatized kids.
The trauma mamas do stuff like:
If your cute 1st grader suckers her teachers into feeling sorry for her by pretending to have lost her lunch, pull that kid out of school! Mama will talk to her about what her feelings are to help her heal, bc she is too delicate of a flower as to have to cope with first grade:
http://homeasoftplacetofall.blogspot.ca/2012/03/evil-siamese-twins-attachment-vs-trauma.html?m=0#comment-form
If the junior high mean girls are a bit mean to you adopted 12 year old, you should pull your daughter out of school and homeschool her instead! The adoptive darling should never ever be expected to learn to ignore the mean girls, not to burst into tears at every single dirty look or learn the sorts of skills that she will need to deal with a snotty colleague at work.
http://traumamamat.blogspot.ca/2012/03/sometimes-it-hurts-too-much.html?m=0
If you adopt a toddler who can walk, you should carry them everywhere, even if they hate it for "bonding" purposes. If your adopted child is traumatized, you should teach them to snuggle in your lap, even if they are 12 and hate it. You should definitely touch your adopted tween all the time ;hugs, snuggled, little pat on the tummy everytime you walk by, shower with your NINE year old, even if she hates it) as these things encourage bonding. Especially if the kid hates it!!
http://www.zehlahlum.com/2012/03/hold-your-baby.html?m=1
Yet another pap railing at the "unfairness" of her agency, which will approved her only to adopt ONE kid(not FOUR like she wants), as she already has 8 children
http://delillefamilyupdates.blogspot.ca/2012/02/dossiers.html?m=0
Thanks anon posters for the new blogs. We will try to check those out later. Anon 8:17 we too have concerns about some parenting methods advocated in the trauma and attachment community and we've talked about it on this blog. However, we aren't out to bash parents who are struggling with their kids–we are here to attempt to better educate and advocate for prevention. Obviously some put themselves out in the public realm as examples of what not to do! We are always concerned about traumatized children and hope to provide good resources where we find them. We also have concerns about homeschooling especially when it is used to hide abuse, but we don't feel it is inappropriate across the board (no blogger here is a homeschooler). Bullying is never ok and difficult for children without challenging histories. The child with past trauma does need extra protection and skills to deal with mean kids, so without having read that blog I don't want to make a judgment on the appropriateness of homeschooling in that situation. But we will look it up.
Re: Reform,
'Rally', I was extensively involved in the reformation of the public education system where I live–including providing more support to special needs and at-risk students, as well as increased measures to catch families and students that would otherwise fall through the cracks. For a disinterested and apathetic education system, this was a significant achievement and has reaped unimaginable benefits for students and families alike.
Was it easy? No.
As someone who has spent years doing so knows, encouraging and (successfully) lobbying for reform–in any field–requires a far more thought-out and professional approach that what I've seen in this blog. When one is lobbying for reform at a state or national level, one is dealing with lawyers, politicians, and multitudes of academic experts with extensive higher education, often including PhDs. If you are to be successful, you must match their level of professionalism–which I don't see at all on this blog. The meetings, the letters, the conference calls, the liasing with media, etc., are all part of the necessary networking and dialogue needed to effect change. Cutting corners doesn't work.
You seem to have a worthwhile agenda in mind–but that agenda is obscured by puerile finger-pointing, poor grasp of effective language, and unsubstantiated research and statistics. No professional of any importance will use this blog as resource with its inflammatory and discrediting rants, and no industry will pay attention because of it; perhaps that is why your attempts at reformation have not yet succeeded. Effective communication skills go far beyond "getting a ton of hits"; the breadth of your audience does not matter if your agenda is unintelligible, your tone unreasonable, and your overall image unprofessional.
If you're serious about enacting widespread reform to national laws, analyze successful campaigns–what did they do? how did they do it? what made them successful?–and model their approach. Aggression is always discrediting–look at how public opinions were swayed during the various Occupy protests, for a recent example.
For an example within your own realm, look over the comments and the post itself. The well-written, persuasive, and reasonable comments are the most salient–and those are not your own. They are those written by 'Meredith'.
Lastly, it is your post that suggested illegal activities occur in the homes of the featured blogs. If the concerns–and the evidence for those concerns–are grave enough for you to publicly denigrate the families, then those concerns should be taken to the appropriate authorities (regardless of your views of their trustworthiness; they are the authorities with the power and the resources to fully investigate the situation, not you via the Internet).
If the concerns and the evidence are not enough to bring to the attention of others, then it shouldn't be featured on your blog. It lacks professionalism, diverts support for your cause, and slides into mere mudslinging. You have laudable goals, but posts like this won't achieve those goals.
Good luck though–you'll certainly need it.
I am really surprised to read a comment on the work the blog owner has been committing herself to, written in such a condescending tone. It is allright to like or dislike the way people present their opinions; suggesting which "successful approach" someone should copy goes a step too far, especially if combined with the observation that "no professional of any importance will use this blog as a resource with its inflammatory and discrediting rants". I assume you have not seen or read the various collections of material on different topics offered here(press coverage and the research). Maybe you should have a look?
The "puerile fingerpointing" is something I always see behind lectures on effective communication strategies, delivered by people who try to hide their agenda behind lessons in politeness.
By the way, if I had not learned my own lesson in politeness long ago, I would be sure to ask if you happen to have a PhD-degree. But, of course, I won't, since personal remarks about peoples' capacities and achievements are not allowed in a civil discourse, right?
(Except, of course, when someone is giving a lecture in communication and marketing).
The question about this PhD came to my mind when reading this section here:
"When one is lobbying for reform at a state or national level, one is dealing with lawyers, politicians, and multitudes of academic experts with extensive higher education, often including PhDs. If you are to be successful, you must match their level of professionalism–which I don't see at all on this blog. The meetings, the letters, the conference calls, the liasing with media, etc., are all part of the necessary networking and dialogue needed to effect change."
Reading this makes me believe there might be some confusion as to what creating change is all about: It is primarily NOT about feeling important, or mixing with important people to increase one's own feeling of importance. Or at least it should not be.
A long time and faithful reader of this blog
that bachelor's degree in education certainly helps:)
Yet another Reece's Rainbow family with a probably illegal gaiming fundraise (the ever popular IPAD giveaway):
http://bringinghomeourchinesebutterfly.blogspot.ca/2012/03/fundraiser-extended-new-prizes-added.html
A Reece's Rainbow PAP, explaining exactly why he/she feels he is really and truly RESCUING an orphan. Photos of said orphan are posted too:
http://gettingawesleyinedgewise.blogspot.ca/2012/03/rescue.html
I think a strong signal of narcissism on the part of the AP is changing the adoptive child's awkward foreign name to a cutesy Americam sounding one, preferably evocative of one who is vulnerable and delicate, such as that of a rare flower- must be rescued, must be sheltered,must be hot- housed.
Thanks to anonymous' March 23 2:39, 3:26; March 24 8:17 and 4:04; Maarch 2 2:46 and 3:24 for sharing all of those blogs. The 3:24 one also has giveaways attached to it using the new craze of go fund me.
I will address comments starting from oldest to newest. As Reformatina stated, I was unavailable last week to comment.
Ashley March 23, yes you are correct that I erred in my comment about bio family, but my post was correct in listing it as a domestic family. Again, establishment of relationship is not the issue. The domestic family had every right to adopt the sibling which you continue to contest. I do not feel it is right of the orphanage director to demand that a local family not try to adopt if a foreign family is somewhere in the process of filing papers.
I do consider automatically assuming that a domestic family has only monetary motives to be on par with bad aspects of adoption and entitlement. So we will have to agree to disagree on that.
Yes, readers should take the blog title literally.
Money issues increase POST adoption for far too many APs, so if you can't afford it preadoption, you aren't going to be able to afford things postadoption when it really counts for a positive outcome for the child.And I have yet to see any fundraising PAP who is "only doing it for preadoption expenses" pay back their donors when they get their tax credit $$$.
Meredith March 23 4:45, as for your "judging" comment, APs and adoptees will be associated with the agency that processed the adoption and may in the future be judged by that regardless of whether one wants to be or not. For cases of corruption and coercion, that has some dire implications.
I have no idea why you think that I am "judging" age or religion. I am pointing out red flags. Concepts such as not adopting two unrelated at once are not concepts that I developed and are not fringe ideas. In fact, these are well-accepted concepts by those in child welfare. Adopting 10 special needs kids before 30 is fringe and disallowed by many organizations and jurisdictions NOT because they are mean, but for good reasons. I know it must make you feel better to label my blog and me as the fringe, but sorry, you are very wrong on that.
I will post whatever I feel like posting.
Adoption is a process, not a blessing. All humans are blessings, including original families and those in foreign countries that adopt.Additionally children are not gifts. They are not objects placed in your home by God.The "gift" in adoption is the responsibility of parenting the child, not the child herself. Please don't blaspheme God by stating that the corrupt adoption process is a blessing.God doesn't do corruption. Instead pray for those who need it-victims in our How Could You? archive.
My blog takes many angles.We develop new things weekly. Don't flatter yourself into thinking that my whole blog is this one post that you don't care about but keep posting comments on. This post illustrates many needed things-it points out real red flags that real people are engaging in. Without awarness of these issues, we can't reform them.
Meredith March 23 6:36:Most children in orphanages actually have families before they enter the adoptive family. So when you state that they *now* have families, you are slighting the original family. That one statement that we see used on so many of these personal blogs assumes so many things, mostly that the original family doesn't care when in fact severely disabled children are often put in orphanages due to poverty/lack of medical care. Adoption is not the cure for that.
In fact, our Three selection in this very post highlights a family that is angry that the original family visits.
I also recommend that you read our newest post that links to Brian Stuy's Research China expose on how China's older children were actually living with their families and were selected by government officials to "enter" the Special Focus program that often was described as an educational program to the original family (not an international adoption program). See http://reformtalk.blogspot.com/2012/04/research-china-shares-all-information.html
When we write any post, we have information like this in mind. These personal blogs represent the "demand" for types of children that are not always being "supplied" in a transparent, ethical fashion that so many personal bloggers believe.
Rally, you have made two allegations which have ended this conversation
1- You have rewritten something similar to what I said, however you've changed it around to make it appear to serve your purpose, then challenged that I have somehow blasphemed God by saying this. Similar to what satan did to Jesus in the desert during the temptations, and I learned my lesson through Christ's example. The adoption PROCESS in many places is not good. I would never suggest that, as you say a “corrupt process of adoption” is God’s intention for adoption. We differ on our description of blessing and gift, and there we should let things lay. I have not blasphemed God by suggesting that He brought our children to us, and you may argue on that by yourself.
2- You have exaggerated our already unusual family to suit your own purposes of further 'putting us down' as something that is wrong. In and of itself, our family already holds an unusual aspect which you've pointed out previously, as have I. However suggesting we have adopted "10 special needs kids before age 30" is again changing the situation to suit your purposes.
I will not further engage, regardless of the implications you attempt to bring against myself, my viewpoints, and my family. I have attempted to have a conversation with you with suggestions toward being less aggressive and more helpful to those whom you claim to want to 'see your side'. It has proven an unnecessary conversation since your response has only been to continue to put down those whom you've deemed unethical or immoral in your concept of right and wrong.
I will leave you with some food for thought:
Colossians 2:8 ESV See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.
Galatians 5:13 ESV For you were called to freedom, brothers. Only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another.
Romans 14:1-23 ESV As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions. One person believes he may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables. Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him. Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand. One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. …
Meredith March 23 11:08, What is "constructive" about this post? Well, in looking at the definition of "constructive" 1.Serving a useful purpose; tending to build up.
2.Derived by inference; implied by operation of law; not obvious or explicit.
The useful purpose is to point out red flags that need awareness and reform. Reform in family preservation, reform in placing children with domestic families before international families, reform of what once was not being done-placing two or more unrelated at once (and frankly even back in the old days that often was two or more *healthy* unrelated children at once). Awareness of APs and PAPs that original families and adoptees read blogs and rightly do not like the attitudes expressed-attitudes of condescension towards original or domestic families, blind obedience to agencies etc.
For new PAPs not all of this is obvious and how all of these things are connected are not obvious until it is laid out. So THAT is why this is constructive.
Anonymous March 24 6:42, thank you for bringing attention to the issue of two or more people with Cystic Fibrosis living together. I wonder if the agencies or governments ever consider the implications of this or provided training. A quick primer on the hazards of germ spreading can be found at http://www.cfcareli.com/livingwithcf_germControl.php Some unique things about 2 or more people with CF living together are that the following is recommended
"Do not share:
◦ respiratory equipment
◦ airway clearance devices
◦ toothbrushes
◦ eating utensils
◦ drinking cups
• Perform your airway clearance in separate rooms
• Avoid hand shaking, hugging or kissing
• Try to keep at least three feet between each other
• Clean hands often"
And a January 2012 article out of Canada http://www.therecord.com/living/healthfitness/article/653557–cystic-fibrosis-patients-urged-not-to-get-together talks about how the foundation "Cystic Fibrosis Canada now urges patients to not attend its meetings or events where more than one person with cystic fibrosis may be present due to the risk of cross infection with potentially deadly bacteria in newly adopted infection control guidelines."
The bacteria that is dangerous is Pseudomonas aeruginosa. I speak from clinical experience that this is *nasty*, difficult to deal with due to drug resistance and in fact can be *deadly*. I am not exaggerating.
Anonymous March 24 3:24: You say "Do you have ANYTHING better to do??? You are pathetic! These people are adopting CHILDREN that will die in their home country. And YOU are sitting around bashing them!
You might have said some rude things about each family but you know what? You just gave each family more publisity for their fundraisers so thank you for that :)"
First,I am pointing out red flags and yes the other 1230+ posts show that I indeed have other things to do-there is a lot of awareness and reform that must take place. We are here to connect the dots and fill in gaps. Obviously, there are endless gaps including pointing out *why* things are WRONG on the *demand* side of adoption (PAP entitlement).
Children that WILL die? You guarantee that? Nothing else could be done but adopt? Did your agency tell you that?
My post is far from "rude"-it points out facts. Seeing the facts of PAP demand and AP condescension laid out doesn't paint a pretty picture, does it? That is the point!
Fundraisers? Wisdom and prudence should be involved in giving *anyone* money. Blindly giving $ to unprepared PAPs in ethically-challenged programs DEFINES pathetic.
Larissa (March 25): Um…I have no clue why you are sharing your pedigree of what you did in education reform.Totally irrelevant to this conversation.I guess even here on *my* blog you feel the need to pat yourself on the back.
What you describe in the following paragraph is pure politics. "As someone who has spent years doing so knows, encouraging and (successfully) lobbying for reform–in any field–requires a far more thought-out and professional approach that what I've seen in this blog. When one is lobbying for reform at a state or national level, one is dealing with lawyers, politicians, and multitudes of academic experts with extensive higher education, often including PhDs. If you are to be successful, you must match their level of professionalism–which I don't see at all on this blog. The meetings, the letters, the conference calls, the liasing with media, etc., are all part of the necessary networking and dialogue needed to effect change. Cutting corners doesn't work."
I call BULL on that. There have been few reforms in adoption. Some reforms include adoptees getting their records open. That involved grassroots efforts to lobby individual legislators. We just updated our post on Alabama reform yesterday. Do you know HOW that occurred? By ONE AP lobbying an individual friend/legislator. YOU may think that how Hague has come down is "reform" but what REALLY happened was the industry wrote the rules. "Nice" groups and individuals gave important input and that was SWEPT aside for political and industry interest. So, I STRONGLY disagree with your weak, kiss-butt tactics.
And I do liaise with media A LOT. Yep, they are interested in what I have to say. Just because I don't need my name in lights doesn't mean that I am not influencing.That is the whole purpose of using pseudonyms. We are just APs and proud of it. And by the way, foreign governments read my blog and see everything that we say and that entitled PAPs say. Furthermore, my title IS Doctor. If it makes you feel better, you can address me as Dr. Rally, but I prefer just Rally.
As for research and statistics-hmmm you must have read something else on my blog: Are you stupid or willfully ignorant to the fact that NO ONE wants to do the research that we do? Disruption tracking HAS NEVER happened and NO ONE-government or industry wants to touch this. Do you really think that ANY postadoption mental health study has been done in the past 10 years that actually HELPS APs deal with consequences? We cobble together everything we can find to assist people personally (nope you don't get to see that) and widely to the general public. We are not waiting for Superman to sweep in and do studies on anything. Superman ISN'T coming. We fill in the gaps,whatever it takes. So go ahead and imply that I am a liar and "unprofessional" if it makes you feel superior.
Oh, and I DO report things to officials. The general public ALSO needs to know these things. Ya know why? Because the government NEVER warns anyone about ethics issues and is extremely slow to speak on impending closures. We try to PREVENT further damage. Read my post Be part of adoption reform. I practice what I preach.
"Reasonable" is a subjective term. We don't expect to win everyone over. We need "just enough" to FORCE changes AGGRESSIVELY. Too bad if you don't like my tactics.We aren't going away.
While I was commenting, Meredith posted, so I will address the April 3 8:14 AM response now:"1- You have rewritten something similar to what I said, however you've changed it around to make it appear to serve your purpose, then challenged that I have somehow blasphemed God by saying this. Similar to what satan did to Jesus in the desert during the temptations, and I learned my lesson through Christ's example. The adoption PROCESS in many places is not good. I would never suggest that, as you say a “corrupt process of adoption” is God’s intention for adoption. We differ on our description of blessing and gift, and there we should let things lay. I have not blasphemed God by suggesting that He brought our children to us, and you may argue on that by yourself."
Ha! Meredith, you have proved my point that you just can't get it through your head that OTHERS interpret what you say differently. Your posts and comments offend people-not all people, but you just can't seem to live with that.It is offensive to compare a child with an object-that is how it comes off even if your intent is different. Somehow, YOU are allowed to be offended by MY post but I am not allowed to be offended by what you say. You are a piece of work.I am offended by all ten things I posted in this post.There are *real* concerns for children and for leading PAPs down a dangerous path that is behind that offense.
You make no sense when you say *I* am changing the situation by discussing and yes labeling adopting 10 special needs children at a young age as a red flag.It IS a red flag.
Cherry picking Bible quotes. That always is the last defense isn't it? Bravo.
Anonymous March 27 regarding name changes. That is a debatable subject with strong opinions. If a child is old enough when adopted, I think they should have a choice in what they want to be called. Different people have different reasoning for keeping or changing names.I do "get" what you are saying and I think that will affect some adoptees. My own immigrant great grandparents Americanized their names-of course that was THEIR choice and I think that is the point you are making. I think if an adoptee later is not happy with either keeping their original name or new name if the AP changes it, that the AP should support a name change. As a parent, you need to make that decision and I do think it is best if you can remain open to how your child feels about *any* decision and be flexible with changes. We did keep our child's original name and that was a personal choice. There were a number of reasons for that. Thanks for bringing that taboo subject to the table!
Meredith, this is Crabbina. You wrote, "Similar to what satan [sic] did to Jesus in the desert during the temptations, and I learned my lesson through Christ's example." Then you quoted several passages from the Bible.
Kindly allow me to point out that people from all over the world read this blog.
It might surprise you to realize that many of them are not Christians; do not and will not ever believe in Satan or Jesus; and think your comments about Satan positively medieval and deserving of no place in 21st century discourse about adoption ethics.
Furthermore, they do not want you or anyone else using personal religious faith as an excuse for what they consider to be unethical behavior, especially since some of the worst adoption agencies in the history of the world are "Christian."
They also find your Christian assumptions and need to share Bible messages offensive and inappropriate.
Thank you for your understanding.
For all, if you have not read the recent in-depth analysis and podcast of Professor David Smolin (a Christian and respected adoption reformer who attends policy conferences, Hague meetings and other important adoption gatherings) about the orphan care movement and Christian adoption, please read http://reformtalk.blogspot.com/2012/01/kudos-scriptural-and-theological.html
The family attempting to adopt the 2 kids with CF (begging for donations to enable them to do so) is also trouble affording necessities for the SN child they adopted last year!
Seeking donations for a carseat/stroller not covered by insurance:
http://nachalaadopt.blogspot.ca/2012/02/tomato-push-chair.html?m=1
Grateful for donated diapers (!):
http://nachalaadopt.blogspot.ca/2012/03/big-thank-you.html?m=1
It's also worth mentioning that one of their kids is immuno-compromised and currently battling a life-threatening drug-resistant MRSA infection. My heart goes out to the family, it's totally not their fault… but that does not strike me as tge best of all possible homes for kids with CF, who are especially vulnerable to infections:
http://nachalaadopt.blogspot.ca/2012/03/update-on-chrissie-health-and-adoption.html?m=1
Even more probably illegal fundraisers by folks "advocating" for someone to adopt ageing out, nearly 16 yr old "kids" in Ukraine, ie legal adults since age of majority is 16:
http://andthisonematters.blogspot.ca/2012/04/last-chance-boys-want-forever.html?showComment=1333474633206&m=1
http://orphanreport.blogspot.ca/2012/03/just-decided-to-do-it.html?showComment=1333068994068&m=1
http://duvalquiver.blogspot.ca/2012/03/dont-miss-your-chance.html?showComment=1332867247113&m=1
Yet another RR family attempting to adopt 3 unrelated children simultaneously:
http://www.ry-ky.com/2012/03/feeling-weepy/comment-page-1/#comment-389
Anonymous April 3 10:45, ugh! Thanks for sharing. I don't see how USCIS can approve a petition for these children. There are a list of reasons for denial "An Orphan Petition May be Denied if:
■ USCIS determines that the prospective adoptive parent(s) do not have the physical, mental and/or emotional capabilities to properly parent a child;
■ USCIS finds that the prospective adoptive parent(s) do not have the financial capabilities to care for a child;
■ a USCIS investigation or the home study reveals a history of abuse and/or violence and/or a criminal history;
■ a USCIS investigation reveals unsuitable living conditions; and/or
■ USCIS determines that the child does not fit the legal definition of “orphan.”
I don't see how the investigation would reveal a SUITABLE living condition for these children and they show that they don't have financial capacity.
More illegal fundraisers for godly Christian reece's rainbow PAPs!!
http://makingthebeckwiths.blogspot.ca/?m=0
Sometimes a homestudy agency does the right thing: reject a family that cannot afford to adopt!
http://obedienthearts.blogspot.ca/2012/04/news-and-call-to-prayer.html
The PAPs attempting to adopt 2 kids with CF despite being unable to afford the adoption or basic necessities (diapers! A carseat!! LITERALLY!!) just got their homestudy approved:
http://www.nachalaadopt.blogspot.ca/2012/04/homestudy-complete-preparing-our-i800a.html?m=1
The Davis family also OPENLY ADMITS to having hit the $1m ceiling on their health insurance, having racked up $80+k in medical debt in the past 4 (!) months and that their current kids (several with profound special needs, like 10 brain tumors, epilepsy, etc) and to ONLY BEING ABLE TO GET MEDICAL CARE BECAUSE SHRINERS AND ST JUDES WILL TREAT THEM FOR FREE!!!!
http://nachalaadopt.blogspot.ca/2011/02/oh-my-medical-and-more-medical.html?m=0
These well-intentioned folks REALLY should not be doing this!! Why would a social worker sign off on 2 CF kids living together (despite the serious health risks noted above)??
What the !?)@ is their social worker thinking? Why on earth is the Davis family doing this?? I thought the law requires APs to demonstrate they have proper health insurance in place before being allowed to adopt?? How can they be stopped? Is there somewhere concerns can be reported? Or a name/address to which these concerns can be reported???
I think Meredith's objection is probably that she doesn't have 10 kids but 8 (pregnant with number 9), and 3 of those 8 – two are nondisabled – are her biological children. Important to be accurate if you're going to cite something like that as a red flag.
Becca, the official red flags are in the post itself which is "Complete with multiple special needs children, Reece's Rainbow, new biological child and the "adventure" is that she will be homeschooling them. Nine children at age 30."
You are correct that she has 9 kids not 10. You "got me" on that. Most foster care agencies would not place kids in a home with 8 children, many special needs. Unfortunately, we have many cases in our how could you archive that involve large, special needs foster and adoptive families.Again, the points in the original post stand. We did go off on tangents in the comments.
No, I completely disagree that it is that point in which Meredith has an issue with. She mentioned "judging",religion and young age specifically (all adoption programs have age ranges so all programs "judge")
The adopting of 10 special needs kids at a young age IS a red flag, not specific to Meredith. But in future Blog-gag-me columns, you will see what I mean by that.
It is the *promoting* of the concepts we list which are high risk that concerns us the most.As I stated in a comment somewhere above, these blogs are on many blogrolls and are linked to in advocating yahoo groups and it is being downplayed by the blog owners and others in the "cause" that this is some universally acceptable "Christian" way, not high risk etc. High risk does not always mean guaranteed failure, but we feel the authorities that are making the decision to place a child should not be placing children into a new, high-risk situations.
For anyone who thinks that there is not peer pressure to adopt more than you can handle, we include agencies and ministries in the peer pressure and we know of several recent disruptions that were after peer pressure, religious pressure to adopt multiple special needs children simultaneously. That is why we bring this point up-it is based on real data.
Oh, I understand the issues there and agree (variably strongly) with each and every concern, but Meredith did specifically object to your inaccuracy, amongst her other concerns, and I wanted to speak up on that particular point as I do think it's important to be as clear as possible, especially when talking about high-risk situations. Yes, adopting 10 disabled children is something of a red flag – but that isn't what Meredith has done.
For clarity, I'm neither an evangelical Christian nor an adoptive parent – I am a member of the disabled people's movement and look on in mute horror at the way so many of these children and young people are spoken about and treated.
I can hardly bear to think about the spending of tens of thousands of Euro/dollars on adopting one child overseas while his and her room-mates from the orphanage are – literally – left to starve. If all these people really want to save 'orphans', fishing out the lucky few and leaving the rest to rot isn't really the way to go about it. Success isn't measured in children disenfranchised from their home, culture and language.
Becca, thanks for keeping us honest.I totally was in error in that comment on 10 vs 9, and quantity of special needs kids as the conversation spiraled out of control. Adding so many kids close together intertwined with biological also is a red flag. We have a list of red flags at http://reformtalk.blogspot.com/2011/09/red-flags-in-international-adoption.html
I am glad you found our site. Part of our aim is to make the general public, not just the adoption community, aware of what is going on. International Adoption placements did not used to be done this way. These situations were not allowed in the past.
I agree about the success measurement. But the adoption industry truly only measures how many kids make it to the US. Stay tuned for a new post on Tuesday specifically exposing this!
Best blog post ever! Thank you for taking some of these moms down a notch – they sometimes make me embarrassed to be an adoptive parent as I don't want other people thinking I'm like them.
Anonymous April 19, I appreciate the compliment. Although it may appear that we are doing this to be mean, we really are not doing this to mock people. This series is to highlight the serious risks, continued PAP entitlement and questionable practices of current adoptions-in foster care and domestic and international adoptions. We don't expect to change the hearts and minds of those engaging in these practices, although we believe some (not those featured) have, but we do this to bring awareness to the general public and PAPs. Additionally, we do this to show that not all APs are like this nor do we support this–we like you have been silently embarrassed about these blogs for too long. We are silent no more…
Hi, I write the afore mentioned Zehlahlum blog and as a person and a parent (to any of my kids) I have surely made many mistakes and many more to come. I am certainly doing the best I can and am open to respectfully discussions of how I can do things better.
I'm not really surprised that my blog has been called out on a site like this because I am really open about our experience and the challenges we have faced and that is bound to rub some people the wrong way. I'm a little surprised that it was this post that was chosen though. I'd like to clarify what I was saying in my post a little bit, just in case there was some confusion about what I was saying. When I said in bold capital letters, "pick that baby up and don't put them down again" that was tongue-in-cheek. I did not actually mean never to let a toddler walk on their own or to carry a child who does not want to be held (within reason).
But, children do need to be held and to be physically touched. It is a human need. And bonding isn't a made-up phrase that needs to be inside of quotation marks. Attachment is a healthy part of a parent child relationship. My post was directed primarily to moms of children with similar ages to my own, which is not even old enough for school yet. I don't see how it can possibly be controversial to be sure those kids (and their parents) are getting enough appropriate physical touch.
For the moms of older children that chimed in, I can see how, at first blush, some of the things that they shared seem shocking. But again, these children need to be touched. And this is not unique to adoption either, tweens and teens need affection and physical touch from their parents as well. If a child has not ever had that contact or has been abused then it's something that needs to be worked up to and introduced gradually.
So if I need to remind myself to carry my daughter a little more (which she likes) so we can happily walk around holding hands in public, or to give her several quick hugs during the day so that we can work up to being comfortable enough with each other to snuggle on the couch while we watch cartoons, or to rock in the rocking chair for ten minutes at a time so that we can work up to being able to rock and read books for 30 minutes on a rainy day, well, I don't think that's anything to mock.
For older children, this is going to look different, but NONE of these moms were doing anything that the children did not like or were protesting. They were being respectful to their children by providing the contact in small increments that the child was comfortable with. No one was showering with an unwilling child, everyone has different boundaries with something like that, but making that implication is wrong.
I NEVER said, and will not ever say, to do anything that the child hates. I said that "the less they like it, the more they need it", but that does not translate into doing something that they hate or forcing anything on them. If they don't like the affection then the burden falls on the parent to find a way to give them that affection in a way that they DO like and in a duration that they don't mind. I was encouraging parents to find positive ways to have healthy physical contact with their children because it's important.
Well, that was a lot to say, but hopefully, that has cleared some things up.
Jamey – folks commenting on your blog post openly admit to showering with their 11 year old adopted daughter and cheerfully bragging that it took 2 years for their adopted now-13 yr old son to enjoy being snuggled in mommy’s lap.
I’m trying to think of circumstances under which putting my 130 lb, 5’9″ giant of a 12 yr old foster son in my lap to snuggle would be anything but totally inappropriate. Ditto my 110 lb, 5’2″ 13 yr old bio daughter. Showering (!) naked (!!!!!) with either at home* could well be a felony!!
* the great big communal shower room at, say, a health club is a different story.