Promises of Confidentiality?
As a birthmom, were you promised confidentiality?
Anne
Dear Anne,
There is finally a trend started towards states opening adoption records. I applaud all who endorse this. Adoption 'laws' are archaic. People seem to think they are cast in stone, and this I do not understand. No laws, except God's commandments were EVER cast in stone. Those we cannot change, but others are changed constantly.
To use the excuse of 'birthmother's confidentiality' is a real cop-out, and
actually should be a moot point. Society stressed that once the papers were signed, birthparents lost ALL rights to their offspring. So... if we have no parental rights, why would we have any say in what our children now want?
This is an issue for adoptees, not birthparents.
Adoption is a sanctioned lie. I am not a very religious person but I do know God commanded us not to lie. So how could especially religious-based agencies endorse closed records? How can they justify 'lying' to a person, i.e. not allowing them the 'truth' of their heritage? Government agencies also stress 'telling the truth' yet they too seem to think adoptees do not
deserve the same truth. Adoptees were not born as a result of anyone breaking the law, so why are birthparents assumed to be in a witness
protection program?
The Bible endorses both adoption AND reunion. God 'gave' us his son, but He fully expected to be reunited with him. Moses likewise was adopted, but he too was reunited wasn''t he?
To endorse closed records is almost humorous. Genealogy is big business. People spend hours digging for little pieces of their pasts. It is seen as very normal. Yet adopted people are just supposed to accept non-blood ties as their own.
I often tell people a little story about a poodle we once had. And this is not to put any damper on adoption, as I see it as a good thing. Anyway, the poor little thing had too many pups and could not nurse them all. So, we took one to the neighbor's cat that had just had kittens. The cat fully accepted the pup and reared him with her litter, no problems. She groomed and fed him right along with the rest, loving him as an animal would its own. The pup was likewise perfectly content with the arangement. BUT the cat also weaned him, and when she did we brought him home. The dog still knew he was a dog. He didn't 'mew'- he barked. We are what we are born. Animals are smarter than we are at times. They have natural instincts, in most cases, to raise their young; however, they know when to 'let go.'
No one 'owns' their children. As adults all parents need to step back and let them be free to be who they are. Parents have no problem loving more than one child, and children should be able to love ALL their parents.
Was I promised this confidentiality thing? Not just 'no' - HELL NO!! The only thing I think that kept me sane was the dream that someday, when my daughter turned 18, we would be reunited. I do recall exactly what was said to me in those judge's chambers, but I do know that seed was planted.
Best wishes,
Lezli
Lezli Adams
AskBmom
found daughter Julie on 3/18/1999
born 10/10/1968 in Ohio
adopted in Indiana now in Texas
Leave no stone unturned.
