For anyone who missed the show…pretty much the whole thing is on the websight as linked above. I, of course was inspired, And though a beautiful helping hand, my letter went to a senior producer and I got to drop a name, though I have editted that out for the world to see here.

—————————————–

I watched the show tonight though a completely different perspective than the general target audience. I am a mother who lost her child to adoption in ‘87 and convention likes to refer to me as the “birthmother”.

I spend a lot of my time working on adoption education and reform. I manage several adoption truth related message boards. I am a founding member and administrator of Soul of Adoption. I am on the Legislative and PR committees on Origins USA. I am a lobbyist with Unsealed Initiative, a grassroots group to support Open records legislation in New York. I have a fairly popular blog, Musings of the Lame, and am writing a book about my adoption experiences. In the course of my internet life, I have come into contact with hundreds of mothers separated from our children as well as adoptees and adoptive parents. Like so many of us, including your aunt, I wonder why we never really see our side, the birth mother, represented in a positive or factual light. I look for things that are considered adoption “mythology” and never pass up an opportunity to educate.

Now I know that the whole spin on this on particular tale was not about a “good” relinquishing mother, but about a deceiving con artist and, of course, the scammed victims should be made sympathetic. What alarms me is how the average non versed in adoption talk viewer might be fed some of this incorrect mythology and be left with an incorrect information about what is considered ethical in prospective adoption relationships.

A lot of the work I do is pointing out the subtle coercive practices used in adoption today and encourage the now educated prospective adoptive parent to choose a higher moral ground. Several of the acceptable practices that were highlighted on the show tonight really feel in the danger zone on my radar.

It is often discouraged to have a pre birth match of an emotional nature like shown for some of the very reasons reported on. As said in the show, every woman considering adoption has the full, though often discourage, right to rethink her choice after the birth and change her mind, the investment of emotions and money can have a very heartbreaking outcome for the ones who seek a child as accurately demonstrated. While they were full victims of scams, the sorrow and loss demonstrated by the couples is in no way isolated, but a given for all perspective adoptive couples after a failed match.

Even in their desperation for a baby, though, some of the things said by Lori Coleman to Amy/Christy were just not acceptable in a relationship between the parties. Lori should not have requested the promise “You’re not going to change your mind, right?” It is coercive for the potential parents to illicit a real promise to bind the mother to her decision. She really will not know her true heart until she gives birth and sees her baby. Many women really want their children, but feel that they have no choice but to choose adoption. Promises cloud the very difficult and final judgment.

The part where the baby clothes are shown would be considered pressure for a mother to fell she must relinquish as intended to the adoptive parents. The emotional relationship between the expectant mother and the prospective parents can be very charged and sometimes manipulated to make a woman feel that she cannot “break the adoptive parents hearts” Having the adoptive couple in the delivery room falls also under that heading. Manipulating this relationship is used today as a technique to ensure placement by some agencies and promoted by some adoptive parents such as Susan Burn’s Fast Track Adoption.

Amy/Christy also had a scene where she is described as “saying all the right things” where really, she is speaking the stereotype of what the public would like to believe a relinquishing mother is like. We are not born missing a synapse in our brain that allows us to walk away from our children; yet when she says “I don’t want to hold her. I just want you to snip and go.” the myth of the uncaring, cold birthmother lives on the TV screen for all of America to see. As repeatedly pointed out in Ann Fessler’s The Girls Who Went Away, the premise of mothers being able to “get over it” is flawed. In fact, I have access to much research that proves that the adoption professionals knew the long term effects of loss and unresolved, continuing grief of the part of the relinquishing mother. Still, to this day, the social worker’s code of ethics is broken by denying this information and allowing a pregnant woman to make an uninformed decision for her life and the life of her child. It would have been helpful for the network to point out that her portrayal of a real relinquishing mother and the love and care for her child were not accurate.

Again, understandably, the prospective parents in this were victims and sympathies were given to them, at times the sense of entitlement that was accepted was way over the top. Use of the words “promised“, and ‘suppose to give us” just have no place in adoption. In the adoption world, even in agency overseen legitimate situations, potential adoptive parents frequently must take the risk at shelling out money, often much greater than the 600, 1200, or even 2000 dollars as shown, for pre birth expenses with no guarantee of a child at the end. As Adam Pertman stated, until the money is taken out of adoption, the risks are huge for all and in most cases, it is not the pregnant woman who benefits, not the adoptive parents, but the facilitators and professionals. It is an industry that makes millions off the transfer of paternal rights and not always with the best of intentions. There are grassroots movements now to try to find an ideal way to rewrite adoption so that the money can be gone and made more ethical, though we foresee that the agencies will have huge issues with that and thwart the efforts for real monetary reform.

Again, with the eyes of someone who has lived this for almost 20 years, some of the wording just cut to the core. “Remember, it’s okay for a potential birth mother to take money from a family, then simply change her mind about an adoption. Who can say what a pregnant woman’s intentions really are?” For anyone really going though the most life altering decision, there is not “simply” involved. These decisions are not made on a whim.
And while I know it was not an education piece about the true realities of all adoptions, but focused on one sensational scam, hearing statements like “we have to go home to an empty nursery” and “It was just like a piece of my heart had been ripped outta me.” really stung. If it was a successful adoption and these adoptive parents did get the baby they so desperately desired, then it would be the natural mother who went home with a deflated belly, leaking breasts and empty arms. She really would be missing a piece of her heart for eternity.

In discussion, we wondered when anyone would ever do a piece on how relinquishing mothers and fathers are scammed out of their children. We wondered if the public would ever be informed of the huge numbers of promises made by adoptive parents regarding openness only to have the doors slammed in the birth mothers face once the ink was dry and with no legal recourse. We wondered when anyone would call out the agencies and make them responsible for their false advertising and fraud by denying facts and research about the long term risks of being a relinquishing mother as opposed to “the sadness fades in time leaving birth mothers with a sense of peace”. We wondered if a warning would ever go out regarding the subtle and not so subtle coercive practices employed by agencies, facilitators, and other professionals who financially benefit from the trade of parental rights.

I was impressed that Dateline dedicated an hour to adoption and by putting it at the end, I understand that this was the piece that you expected viewers to turn in for. Since adoption is selling in America and with other truth based media, such as Fessler’s book, garnering attention, it would be wonderful if the television was used to represent a non sensational, but fact based and fully representational view of the ethical issues and lies perpetuated by the adoption industry. That would be something that would really be beneficial for all, not just the handful of people scammed by a few minorities, but for the huge millions of people touched by adoption.

As my involvement in adoption has given me great access and research into these issues and I am dedicated to getting it out to the public in any way. I would celebrate and welcome any inquiry to further NBC’s understanding and would assist in any way possible. I know that often the relinquishing mother is not in the public eye or even on their mind for any positive purpose. We are not a silent segment of the adoption world anymore. We just can’t get anyone in power to listen to us. It would be a ground breaking miracle and generate much attention for the network if you helped us raise our voices.

Thank you.