A Controversial Topic in Adoption?
August 15th, 2007 by janetWe all know that reunions between birth parents and adoptees don’t always go smoothly or last the distance. But why is it that relationships between biologically related people are so difficult and take so much work?
I came across a blog post by Amba which addresses this sensitive subject. In her post, she reviews a book by David Jones entitled “My Father’s House”, an adoption memoir written twenty odd years ago. In this book, a couple of thought-provoking ideas are raised.
The overall theme is that blood is not thicker than water, ie that being genetically related does not guarantee acceptance or bonding. Jones describes a practise in ancient Roman times when a man who sired a child had to have that child placed at his feet after birth, so that he could pick it up and “bond” or adopt it as his own. Without this happening, the father has not committed himself to being the father of that child.
Jones goes on to align adoption with marriage. In marriage, each person chooses the other and makes a commitment to a relationship. In adoption, there is also choice and an agreement to commit to an ongoing relationship.
Jones’ message is clear. When parents and children are forced apart by adoption, the “bond”, albeit biological, has been broken and is not strong enough to ensure a connection when these parties meet later on in life. He believes that the reason that adoptees see their adoptive parents as their “real” parents is because of the choice factor, despite it being one-way rather than two-way.
This perspective may evoke some heated debate. Is Jones mainly speaking about birth fathers who don’t carry the grief and loss that birth mothers do? And how does he explain the really strong relationships between separated families wen they are finally reunited? And what about the myriad of other factors that come into play when families affected by adoption come together?
For those adoptees who struggle with the question about why their reunions haven’t succeeded, such a theory makes perfect sense. Perhaps it is a chink of the puzzle that forms the complex picture of adoption.
Posted in Adoption, Book, Genetics. Permalink for this post: permalink.
If you are a Digg user, please 
Digg this post. If you use use Del.icio.us, then add us in: 
Del.icio.us
What do you think?
Leave a comment! Or send a trackback from your own blog.
Like to read more? Subscribe with RSS
August 15th, 2007 at 10:55 pm
Hi Janet,
Interesting post! In working with all sides of the adoption community, as a clinical psychotherapist, even though there are some reunions that may have “growthing blocks” at first (and what reunion doesn’t when one is getting acquainted with the other part, as in any day-to-day relationship), for the most, reunions do work out. It takes time to get to know each other, as in any other relationship.
I have not read Jones’ book, however I can provide a perspective based on professional and personal experiences. I do disagree with Jones’ message: “Jones’ message is clear. When parents and children are forced apart by adoption, the “bond”, albeit biological, has been broken and is not strong enough to ensure a connection when these parties meet later on in life”;
Since every person is different and unique, so is each reunion and relationship that is build. One cannot deduce that the bond is not strong enough to ensure a connection, as a generalization. There is a longing in every parent and child forced apart by adoption, who wants to know about the other party (those that don’t, in my experience are experiencing fear and perhaps denial because of the historical shame and guilt that is carried. Often times parties will talk about a “black hole” in the pit of their stomaches….a feeling of emptiness…. both natural mothers/fathers and adoptees fantasize about the other (what they would be like, look like, etc.). It’s only in reunion can these questions be answered and for all parties to heal from the separation.
There is a lot of grief and pain that all parties carry…feelings of abandonment and rejection, etc. As a reunited adoptee, aside from being a certified pre/post-adoption, adoption reunion counsellor/coach, in the end, the nature of adoption is very complex and multi-faceted.
August 17th, 2007 at 12:03 pm
Christine,
Thank you so much for your very astute comments and perspective. I agree with you totally that both interest and a need to know exist between parties separated by adoption. As you said, guilt and denial can be road blocks in forming and maintaining relationships. I also think that some birth parents may feel they don’t have the right to be part of the adoptee’s life as they have not contributed to that person’s development. They stand back, not wanting to be seen as taking any credit for the adoptee’s achievements in life. This may be part of the guilt and shame that is so common in adoption.
This goes for adoptees, too. That whole issue of whether they have the right to be involved in their birth families’ lives can get in the way of forming firm relationships.
As you said, the issues in adoption are complex. There is no one single reason why some reunions don’t succeed.