Did Jesus Tell You To Lie?

Seems that somebody is having a bit trouble with the truth.  I had engaged in a very civil discourse on open adoption records with this liar and she twisted my words.  I don’t like that.  It seems that she wants to make people believe that I support “mutual consent” in matters of birth certificate access.

Crazy lying bitch.  I do not in any way support mutual consent laws.  I believe that adoptees should have free access to their birth certificates.

Here’s the post followed by comments..

he Legal History of Adoption in the U.S.

“Kippa Herring” has posted several comments regarding the research of Professor Elizabeth Samuels, who published her overview of the legal history of adoption in the U.S. in the Rutgers Law Review ( Winter 2001), entitled  “The Idea of Adoption.” Rather than print selected quotes from Samuel’s work, I’ve decided to refer you to the article so you can read it in its entirety.

Although Professor Samuels (like Kippa) is in favor of mandated open records (as opposed to the “mutual consent” approach advocated by the National Council for Adoption and myself), Samuels’ paper is helpful in providing a historical context for understanding the complexities of the issue, and how balancing the respective (often conflicting) needs and responsibilities of all three sides of the adoption triad have challenged state legislatures and social agencies alike for more than sixty years.

For those of you who are new to this, mandated open records ”unseal” original birth certificates of adult adopted children (and other persons of interest), regardless of whether the biological parents agree to having identifying information released to the (adult) child.

At this time, only a handful of states allow adult adoptees unrestricted access to their original records, although this is something that a variety of nationally organized advocacy groups (such as “Bastard Nation” and “Unsealed Initiative” are fighting to change).

Nevertheless, adoptive parents will want to educate themselves about the issue so you can be prepared when your child broaches the subject of his birth parents. Not all adopted children decide to look for their birth parents, but most have feelings about their birth families that we — their parents – need to help them work through, even if search and reunion is not a possibility.

Information is power, the saying goes. By educating ourselves about the issues surrounding adoption, we empower ourselves to give our children the support they need to reconcile and integrate the two sides of their heritage.

No two families will approach this the same way. It may be that your child has no interest in finding his birth family. If he does, try to relax and not take it as a sign that he is rejecting you.From what I’ve read, there seems to be little connection between an adopted child’s desire to know his birth family and the strength of the bond he has with his adoptive parents. Just this afternoon I spoke with a radio producer whose older sister found her birth family, and yet he had no desire to do so.

In any event, this article is well worth reading, no matter where in the adoptive triad you stand.

4 Responses to “The Legal History of Adoption in the U.S.”

  1. Thank you for posting this, Heidi.

    “Information is power, the saying goes.”
    Which is one reason, among others, why adopted people deserve to have the right to information about their origins restored to them – and I use the word “restored” deliberately, because that right was eroded and eventually lost during the middle of the 20th century.

    I would also like to include the opinion of Margaret Somerville, Canadian ethicist and academic. She is the Samuel Gale Professor of Law, Professor in the Faculty of Medicine and the Founding Director of the Faculty of Law’s Centre for Medicine, Ethics and Law at McGill University. She is a remarkable woman and someone to be taken seriously even where one disagrees with her.

    The excerpt (below) is from a 2007 panel discussion about ethical problems relating to assisted reproductive technology, but she also relates to children’s human rights in general:

    “Recently I’ve been working on children’s human rights with respect to their biological origins and biological families.
    In that work I’ve argued that we must recognize that children have human rights with respect to knowing the identity of their biological parents and, if at all possible, their immediate and wider biological families; having a mother and a father, preferably their own biological parents; and to come from natural biological origins.”

    She also says that “It is one matter for children not to know their genetic identity as a result of unintended circumstances.
    It is quite another matter to deliberately destroy children’s links to their biological parents, and especially for society to be
    complicit in this destruction.”

    You can read more here:
    http://www.canadianconstitutionfoundation.ca/files/pdf/The%20Intersection%20of%20Freedom%20-%20Margaret%20Somerville.pdf

    She also believes that emphasis should be placed on the rights of the child, so that if an adopted person seeks disclosure of their adoption records, that information should be disclosed *whether the parent who placed the child consents or not*, because everyone has the human right to know their origins.
    The reverse, on the other hand, wouldn’t necessarily hold true. In her opinion, a parent would only be entitled to information about a child who’d been placed for adoption if they consented.

  2. “For those of you who are new to this, mandated open records ”unseal” original birth certificates of adult adopted children..”

    Also for those who are new to this it might be worth noting that adoptees do not remain children all of their lives. They do become adults. For perspective should those not adopted be referred to as adult biological children, adult natural children, adult unadopted children? Sounds rather silly, doesn’t it?

  3. I would think that even those who are new to adoption would realize that children (by definition) grow up.

    It was a simple typo. Thanks for pointing it out.

  4. Kippa:

    “…having a mother and a father, preferably their own biological parents; and to come from natural biological origins.”

    With regard to reproductive technology, I’d have to say that Professor (?) Sommerville is arguing against invitro and other forms of artificial reproduction, which is consistent with traditional Catholic teaching. And I fully agree that, if mandated open records becomes the norm, donor records must also be released as well. That would be simple justice — the same standard for both mother and father.

    As for the final paragraph, it’s important to distinguish between “rights” and “desires.” As “Addie” pointed out, these individuals are no longer children, but adults. “Mutual consent” would seem to be the logical middle ground.

    Nice try fuckwit.

    here’s the second comment she refused to put up…

    Comment:
    Please do not presume that I would think that mutual consent would be a logical middle ground.  I do not.  My biological history belongs to me, just as yours belongs to you.  I have as much right to know what that heritage is as anyone else.

    There is no middle ground.  Something that is so uniquely mine cannot be denied me, it is my right to know this.


    And the response..

    Frankly, it’s not my concern whether you think this is logical middle ground — you are entitled to your opinion, and the express it … on YOUR blog.

    As I’ve said to Kippa, I’m not interested in prolonging the discussing about open records on my blog at this time. There are strong points of view, and frankly because each of us has formed an opinion from which we are unlikely to budge, further discussion is pointless. I’ve deleted your comment, in keeping with my comments policy.

    Feel free to link and respond as you see fit … but at EMN, I get to moderate and direct the conversation as I see fit. I’m sorry if you disagree with my viewpoint.

    Heidi Saxton

    Author, “Raising Up Mommy” and “Behold Your Mother” (http://www.christianword.com)

    Founder, “Extraordinary Moms Network”
    (
    http://extraordinarymomsnetwork.wordpress.com)

    Proud of herself, isn’t she?
    Well that bitch can lick me.
    She’s a liar who will do anything to support her little bitty position.  Her faith and/or intelligence is obviously so weak that she will not take on a civil debate.  She just another useless crying bitch who can’t back up what she lays down.
    Now go do your penance for being a liar, little Heidi.  Jesus will forgive you.

Oh, and if you’ll notice she said that she would delete my comment from her blog.  She hasn’t done that either.  Just another lie.

OK, she finally took that down.  But she’s still a liar.

Here’s my latest communication with Heidi The High Strung Convert..

Hah! Thanks for such a constructive and thoughtful response.

I’ve not read your blog, and based on what I’ve read about your perspective
so far, I seriously doubt that will change anytime soon. But I’m sure there
are plenty of those who share your viewpoint who will be happy to let you
“preach to the choir.” I just happen not to be one of them.

H.

And my response..

No sweetie, it’s you that has the choir.  I have minions, they look
like the monkeys that fly out your ass every time you lie.  Well I
have the minions, and I have readers.  You see if I bring up a topic
I’m willing to defend my position, it’s called integrity. I doubt you
would know anything about it.


Advertisements

If You Really Hate Me…

here’s a chance to have a great time reading an in depth analysis of me.

Adopto-moron talks about Addie, Jesus, and lots of other things she has no idea about.

You’ll also be treated to some really great church music.

Here are some highlights…..

How do we know? And then what should we do about it? Does all of this matter in the “big picture” of life? I’m realizing that there is a lot of controversy surrounding this topic . . . . and there a many adult adoptees who did not have that “wonderful” experience that we all strive to accomplish when we, as parents, decide to build our family through adoption. I discovered this blog yesterday, and it broke my heart. And, having raised my own four biological children before adopting Gracie and Annie, I know that biology guarantees nothing. Some children, adopted and non-adopted, grow up feeling safe, secure, loved, and cherished . . . . . and others, oftentimes in the same family and experiencing exactly the same parenting style, grow up angry, disillusioned, and frustrated with the world.

Luckily my a-parents style was much different than yours, honey.

BTW, I’m not frustrated with the world, just your little ruffly corner of it. Did you even read my blog, or just the post about that Chapman dork?

I think that sometimes people who grow up as adoptees, assume that everything in their life that was or is negative, would be different if they just hadn’t been adopted by THESE parents, or that everything would be better in their life if they hadn’t been adopted at all.

Good that you’re thinking, but you’re wrong. I’m sure you’re used to that. Actually my life’s pretty positive. I never said my a-folks were bad parents. In fac, if you read as well as you “think” you’d know that.

Has anyone ever done the assume thing with you? You know when you assume you make an ass out of you and me? Ever heard that? Guess not.

Life is difficult, no matter the circumstance.

No shit, Sherlock.

I realize there are specific issues that revolve around adoption . . . . .

Yes, and the Earth revolves around the sun. Good thinking there genius.

I was adopted by my step-father at the age of five. And I met my biological father once, when I was 17, and when I could not do what he needed me to do for him, he sent me away and I’ve never heard from him since. I don’t even know if he is still living.

Are you projecting your bad adoption experience onto me? Sure looks like it.

And we need to have great compassion for those who have suffered heartache from their experiences of adoption.

I’m really try here with you. Next time you might let me know you’d linked to me, it makes me feel much more compassionate, since we’ve established you need that.

Perhaps they will talk with me, so that I can learn how recognize the kinds of issues that cause life-long frustration and resentment. I’m an optimist!

Good for you. The world loves an optimist. Now go optimize on somebody else.

Because many children who are adopted are there because the birth parents loved them so much, that they were willing to suffer the heart break of allowing their children to leave them for a better life.

There you go assuming again, ass out of you and me, remember?

You obviously have no idea what my story is, so shut the fuck up. You stupid know it all repressed little piece of brainlesness.

It’s a serious discussion, but one which me must enter into. Adoption is about a life, a very precious individual, and we must always remember that.

Yeah it is a serious discussion and you’re obviously not ready to have it. You might try preparing yourself before you attempt to engage in a discussion next time.

Great huh?

I hope my haters have enjoyed this little interlude. I sure know I have.

I Don’t Moderate Comments..

so when I get a notification that I need to moderate a comment it usually means someone’s threatening legal action. This one came as kind of surprise, in reference to this post, Jesus Freak Saves Orphans..(I removed the links to protect the guilty, BTW)

Hi, fellow adoption blogger,

I’m sorry to spam you with this, but I’m an adoption blogger being threatened and I need your help.
Warmly,
AB

This article was published in our local paper. It was live yesterday, apparently they removed it.

I blogged about it here. some months ago, using direct quotes. I got this comment yesterday, then again today in my private email box:

A.B. You need to remove your Blog on “Read it and Puke”. Your blog is not based on Fact and it is very offensive to this family. I do not want Lisa and Scotty to see what you have written as they did not write the newspaper article. It was written by someone that does not know them and to be quite honest they were pressured by family to submit a picture to help advertise the fundraiser. The author of the article may not be familiar with the process of adoption or the complete intentions of this couple. They actually were trying to adopt a special needs child. And they actually have explored the option of DHR adoption. They were urged from friends that are foster parents not to adopt from within that system for personal reasons that do not include “just wanting a little white infant”. This was not a requirement of the Bartlett’s. What you have to understand is that just by your reading an article written by someone that does not know them does not justify such a hateful blog
personally attacking them as a couple or their intentions to adopt. If someone wrote and article about you or your work with the School or your church…. and it was someone you did not know, basically you have no control over what they publish. Some information may be speculation or just filling in the spaces to make an article they feel is worth reading. I beg of you to remove this before they see it. They have been through many hard times and much loss. Lisa has never been able to have a baby. They have been trying for many years to conceive. And for the record neither one of them are fertile. If you have never been in this situation and you have been obviously very blessed with your beautiful children you have no idea how hard this can be for a childless couple. I know that the internet is a place for free speech. But I would not think that the type person you portray yourself to be would not want to intentionally inflict pain on this family. You obviously work with the public,
school, and with your business and connections with your church I would not think that this is the type impression that you would want to make. I do not honestly believe that you would intentionally want to harm someone by such a hurtful article as “READ IT AND PUKE”. Please consider what I am asking to do. There is nothing good that can come of these words written against them.

If I do not hear from you I will explore my other options. Legal, etc.

I need anyone who is a blogger to read the quotes and blog about it if you want to.
FWIW Here is my response:

Dear Sir or Madam,

I am simply a blogger blogging on newspaper articles and social networking sites published openly. The inferences drawn were reasonable. It is up to the newpaper publisher to confirm the factuality of stories they publish. As a blogger, I reacted to */quotes in a news story./* Not individuals. When a story is published it becomes fair game for open discussion, and not everyone who read the story would feel that their motives were good and noble. It is possible that the family did not know this upfront.

I don’t “hold myself out to be” anything other than a sinner, saved by grace. I did soften the (many months old) post after receiving your comment.
I regret that you feel that the comments made might be hurtful to the family. As an adoptee, few things drive me to vitriol than sentiments that people deserve babies and it is unfair to deprive them of them. I disagree that there is little or no good that comes of blog postings like mine. People slowly realize that healthy adopted infants grow up, that we are not chattel, and that we aren’t always appreciative for what transpires, purportedly on our behalf.
If you feel that my blog post is deserving of legal action, I am happy to encourage your attorney to correspond directly with my attorney.
Yours,


Mrs. B.I have no idea who these people are. The commenter seems to be an adoptee, Christian mom, who had about the same reaction to the Chapman story that I did, if in a bit milder way. Who this person is threatening legal, again, I have no idea.

That’s what bothers me.

The letter in the link wasn’t signed, there was no link, or email address, to where it might have come from. I have no idea if this person threatening legal action is somehow connected to the Chapman organization ( I doubt it), a crazed stalker fan (I assume Chapman has those), or just a pissed off church lady(my bet). Whatever, I’m not linking it up. I don’t take anything on faith at According To Addie, and I’m not about to get into the middle of a church lady cat fight.

The fact that my post had nothing to do with the article that AB’s (whoever she is) post was linked to, also makes me wonder. I linked to an entirely different article. Could this be a lame ass attempt at some kind of viral marketing? Who knows? It just doesn’t seem right.

I suppose this frustrates me further because I was hoping to inspire some really good righteous cross pounding by militant Christian adoptive parents with my original post. I found it disappointing I was only able to draw one slightly miffed post concerning the legal definition of an orphan. I had hopes for rabid fans and adoptors galore.

Oh well, I’ll just throw this cross up on the hill and see what happens.

Hey! Steven Curtis Chapman, They Aren’t Orphans

Please read here before commenting on the tragic death of Steven Curtis Chapman’s Daughter

https://addiepray.wordpress.com/

And please note that this post was written months before the death of Steven Curtis Chapman’s daughter and has absolutely nothing to do with her. This post only concerns Mr. Chapman’s career decisions.

Check out this asswipe for Jesus..

Change For Orphans

I guess every child available for adoption is now an orphan according to this moron. Yep, every child available has no biological family, Jesus killed them all so Chapman could be a good guy.

Chapman had such a good experience with adoption that Jesus is killing off entire families so his fans can too experience the miracle of adoption. What a savior this guy is.

Seriously we all know that the vast majority of theses kids are not orphans in the traditional sense of the word, but it sure as hell makes folks feel good about themselves to think about them this way. They can conjure up images in their stupid little sheepy heads of Dicksenian waifs begging in the streets until Jesus (and a big injection of cash from Chapman) moves them to be saviors. All this without any pesky obviously Godless natural family to worry about. Meanwhile Chapman gets all kinds of good press. Hey it’s a win-win for everybody. Especially the grateful little orphans who not only get the chance to be raised by these self-centered, savior complex ridden, bad music listening, dips for Jesus, but might get the chance to promote super-savior Chapman’s career by appearing on stage.

What a fucking low-life this guy is, using available children, conveniently labeled orphan, to sell his latest album. What’s the matter Steven, did Jesus not get you the distribution deal that you needed to move product?

Go To the Light, Boy

There are many things in this world that make an adoptee feel short changed.  Closed records, denial of ethnicity, the list goes on.  I wonder if these things ever end, even in the afterlife.

We’ve all heard the stories from those who have been clinically dead and revived.  The white light, the feelings of complete peace, grandma standing there with a plate of cookies.  It all sounds very nice and reassuring.

I’m not sure if I believe any of it, I am unaffiliated as faith goes.  In fact I am much more likely to believe that death is just that, death.  We don’t go on.  No part of us remains after the synapses quit firing.

But what if I’m wrong?  What if we do go on?  Is the adoptee experience unique even into our leaving this plane of existence?

I’m sure everybody gets the white light, but who’s waiting?  Do I get my dear a-grandmother or the b-grandmother I never knew?  If they didn’t know me or know about me, will they show up?  What the heck would they have to say to me if they did? Do they have to show up if they want to or not?

Will my a-relatives be able to get in to my premere in the after world?  If not, will they even be notified?  Is there a list they can sign up for?

What if I don’t want to see them?  Will I have to put up with their presence like someone that you feel obligated to invite to events in life?  Can I have them escorted out? Is there the possibility of a free for all, knock down drag out fight?  If so, would anyone get hurt?

Guess I’ll just have to wait and see.

20 Things #4

3. Your existence is justified.

Some would have you believe that your existence is only justified on this Earth as an adoptee. If you hadn’t been adopted you would be nothing but a Dickensian waif thrown into a orphanage and ultimately destined for a life on the street begging, selling oranges from a cart, or engaged in the rough trades.

Don’t believe it.

They tell you, and in truth themselves, these things in order to justify their own actions as adoptors, perpetuate stereotypes, and/ or make brownie points with Jesus. The fact of the matter is, if they hadn’t adopted you, someone else would have. There are, and have been waiting lists for children, since time immemorial. Why do you think perspective adoptive parents bitch so much about the wait? It’s because you were a commodity in demand.

The bleak images that many within the adoption industry seek to promote at every opportunity are for the most part a complete fabrication. The worlds of Oliver Twist, Jane Eyre, and Little Orphan Annie, just don’t exist. There are no work houses, no foreboding buildings filled with rascals that break into “It’s A Hard Knock Life” while scrubbing the floor, and no being put into service. The fact is, if you were adoptable, somebody would have adopted you. Hell, citing the examples above everything would have at least been interesting even if you hadn’t been adopted.

Your existence is also not justified by the need that you fill in your adoptive parents lives. You are not here only to fulfill their expectations. You ave the absolute right to the life you chose to live. As we have already established, your adoptive parents were lucky to get you, were granted the opportunity to raise a child, and took the child that was available. They should expect nothing more than that. They have plenty of cute pictures to show off, just leave it at that.

You did not escape a fate worse than death because your parents adopted you. You could have ended up in a variety of situations. Better, worse, or most likely very similar to the one you grew up in. This is something you had absolutely nothing to do with. You were not even a legal party to your own adoption. This very fact speaks volumes of how much you were truly considered in the process.

You aren’t here as a poster child for the adoption industry either. You are in no way obligated, a. to tell everyone you meet that you were adopted or, b. spout warm fuzzies about your experience if your adoption becomes the topic of discussion. The adoption industry employs many people to do just that, let them do the work for you. It is not your responsibility to make everyone in the world feel good about adoption. If you were to be a cheerleader, you would have come with a pleated skirt and pom-poms.

Many people decided your fate. All motivated by their own perceptions, prejudices, and agendas, none of which you have to justify. Considering that some of these agendas were in direct conflict with each other makes for an impossible task anyway. You are not Superman, please try to keep in mind he is also fictional when thinking about your role in these matters.

Your existence is justified because you are here. You are living a life, effecting the outcome of other lives just by being present. You cannot be expected to be able to adjust your every thought and move to other expectations. The fact is most people’s perception of you doesn’t have to have everything to do with your being adopted. You do have some control over this.

20 Things #3

2. You and Jesus really don’t have all that much in common.

Have you been told that you were at the center of some God initiated conspiracy to be placed with your adoptive parents? That maybe your a-folks couldn’t have children of their own for a reason? That another woman found herself in a difficult situation just so you could be adopted? That folks at social services or an agency fulfilled the role of angels his scenario? You are not alone, this is a common piece of adoption mythology. It also makes about as much sense as them telling you they found you under a cabbage leaf.

There were real and distinctly ungodly forces working in order to get you adopted. These included agencies, advertising, and the state court system. None of these are directly overseen by any supreme being.

Your parents may have prayed for a child, but only if you subscribe to the adage that God helps those that help themselves, can you even begin to connect the adoption process with anything like the divine. There is some precedent in Christian tradition for children being granted for reasons of God’s choosing, but these almost always involve incest, immaculate conception, or old ladies producing children to be savior’s playmates. So unless you, or your bestest buddy, are doing the twist on the surface of the swimming pool, I think we can count that out.

Even if the agency involved with your adoption was connected with a church, it was by no means a case of the hand of God working to bring you to your destination. It’s just too problematic to work out which God inspired agency had the right bead on God’s true work. The big two in adoption, the Catholics and the Later Day Saints, can’t even agree on what their main man Jesus was up to for several years, I doubt they would agree that any child that would come into the other’s possession had much potential for eternal blessing.

The very thought that God would go to such round about means as adoption requires to bring your parents a child is just silly. Think about it, as nice people as your a-parents might be, what have they done to justify these lengths? Just wanting a child really doesn’t fly with God. Those on record that have been divinely granted children have gone through a whole hell of a lot either previous to receiving their miracles, or very soon thereafter. Driving you to soccer practice, allowing you to take up the trombone in the fifth grade, or even surviving your teenage rebellion, just doesn’t rate.

On the same note what about you? If you are truly a gift from God, what have you done? Divine status has it’s responsibilities and expectations. Unless you are the new Messiah or part of his crew, that pretty much leaves you out. If you think you might be the new Messiah, at this point I should probably suggest you do a bit more serious reading than this, on psychological issues. If you do not at this point have any ascribed miracles, bilocations, or feel the need to lead a political and social movement redefining an established religion, I feel that we can move on.