It’s often very confusing being a birthmother. We get such mixed messages.
Sometimes, the differences come within the company we keep; an anonymous opinion made by an adoption bystander might say one thing, but then the more “educated” adoptive parent might say another. The simplest example of these mixed messages is the birthmother as the “sinner” or the “saint” scenario.
Too many times to count, someone has either accused me of being an irresponsible whore or glorified my act of relinquishment as that of a true family-building angel. These are obviously completely opposite points of view that most likely are based upon the speakers’ level of experience with adoption. For the person whose connection with adoption is mostly on a superficial level, h/her understanding is oftentimes based on the sensational; the stories that make the news, the celebrity tabloids, or popular daytime talk shows. As the more publicized stories grab the headlines, “facts” can be based on either true adoption nightmares or a saccharinely sweet adoption stories, So, a person’s developed viewpoint could be more extreme. Whereas, once in the safety of Adoption Land, the politically correct mode of honoring and respecting the birthmother grows in value. It’s almost like the two varied adoption extremes come closer together, but more tightly layered. Both stereotypes are still there, yet only the positive is visible and acted upon openly. Of course, the underlying feelings of shame and judgment exist still, even if no one talks about them. I wonder what is left unsaid. It can feel like people hope the birthmother is a saint, while being afraid she is really a sinner.
It is even more confusing when, depending on the timing and the circumstances, birthmothers can be viewed as both saint and sinner at the same time.
Sometimes, it is self-less to relinquish a child to adoption. We are hailed as strong. Platitudes such as, ” I can’t image how difficult it might be,” are sprinkled on our wounds like confetti. It is acknowledged that relinquishment is painful to the original mother, but her pain is accepted as necessary for the greater good of the child. She is given credit for doing the “right thing,” even if that act comes with great personal suffering.
However, the very same act of relinquishment can be seen as self-ish. The unloading of the mothering responsibilities on the adoptive parents who “wake up in the middle of the might, change the diapers, and kiss the boo-boos” sometimes are not viewed as parenting joys, but as parenting work. In this instance, adoption relinquishment is viewed as taking the easy way out: finding another family to do what a mother is not willing to do. Whether or not she is capable or desiring is irrelevant. It has been suggested to me more than once that I should be grateful to my son’s parents for doing my job for me. Yet that job that I am supposed to thank them for is one that they wanted desperately. “Dear Birthmother” letters pepper the internet with scores of hopeful parents literally vying in competition for the “honor” of being chosen to parent a woman’s unborn child. I guess we are to thank them after awarding them this honor?
Does the opposite work? If a mother decides that she wants to do the work of parenting and not relinquish her child to adoption, it would stand to reason that then she is self-less. Yet, when an expectant mother considering adoption chooses to parent her baby, she is often deemed as being self-ish, for giving into her own wants and desires to parent. If she really cared about the child, then she would do what is deemed best by other parties and relinquish her child to the more deserving adoptive parents.
In the saint mode, a relinquishing mother is a good mother for recognizing that her child deserves better than she can give them at the time. “Only you know what is best for your baby,” is the creed and a loving mother will choose adoption for her child’s best outcome. That’s in all the marketing materials; “Adoption is a loving choice,” and “I didn’t give my baby up, I gave him more.” Again, the signs of sacrifice and putting another’s needs ahead of her own is what is valued.
Yet, I have seen and heard it said that a mother isn’t even worthy of being a mother if she even considers adoption! Just the act of doubting her ability at a troubling time, when facing an unplanned pregnancy that leads up to a request for information only is sometimes enough to get her declared a “bad” mother in the forum of public opinion. “If you wanted your baby, then why did you call the agency? No one forced you to call.” Yet, how can one make a choice without even having information? There seems to be no way to safely consider adoption without that act alone.
So how can that be? How can we be “good” if we do relinquish, but “bad” for considering the act that would eventually be “good”? Does not the final goodness cancel out the bad? Considering adoption and getting in contact with an agency or adoption professional is a step that must be taken in order to get to the final place of being good and selfless. How can we have a required path and then penalize one for taking that path?
Birthmothers get heralded or even thanked for “choosing life,” as it is often assumed that terminating the pregnancy is the opposite choice. Yet, in the same sentence, we can be chastised for getting pregnant in the first place. The criticism can range from shaming for having sex, to having sex when one is not ready (according to generic social standards) to parent a child, all the way to shaming for actually conceiving. The message is that it is okay to choose life, but it is not okay to create life. Good people do not have accidental pregnancies. There is a common assumption that birthmothers are horribly irresponsible for becoming pregnant in the first place. I guess that irresponsibility comes from not being in a perfect life where everything works out and children come only as planned.
A birthmother can stop being criticized for being irresponsible if she makes an adoption plan for her baby. The saintly sacrifice of her child is deemed a selfless responsible act. However, she must go through with the plan and never waiver. Desiring her own child puts her in danger of becoming selfish and irresponsible again. The message is that if an expectant mother even thinks about adoption, she must follow that path down to completion.
It is even confusing on the highest level of grand adoption mythology. We are told that birthmothers make the “loving adoption plan” because we care so much about or baby’s welfare, we want them to have “the best”. Granted we walk a slippery slope when we measure the worth of a parent based on the material gains such as a bigger home, newer cars, designer clothes, and a perfectly matched infant layette set, but these become more than just desired for a child, they are what all children deserve. The measure of love a mother has for her child can be seen as how much she is willing to endure for the improved welfare of her child and adoption can be seen as the ultimate sacrifice made by a mother out of her pure love. Of course, this view would vault a birthmother to a place of honor and respect.
But then what do people in general see as the purpose of adoption? Ask the next random 12 folks on the street and I would be willing to bet that more than one will parrot; “Adopting is about providing homes for unwanted children.”
Unwanted children?
Are we talking about the same children that deserved so much that their mothers were willing to face permanent separation as to avoid this child every going without- not just the basic necessities of life, but all the perks that go along with being life somewhat privileged? That same kid? How can it be that we nod to the birthmother and reassure her that she is doing right by giving her child “more” and then turn around and accept the generic description that adoption is for unwanted children. How does that child that was so deserving acquire the “unwanted” label? It’s nothing they , the adoptee, did do to earn this mark; the adoptee is usually a mere newborn. It’s not the adoptive parents who add unwanted to the mix for their line in the story is to hold their tired arms out achingly for said baby. The blame, the one who doesn’t WANT, falls back upon the mother, yet the whole machine is built upon her inability to do anything but WANT her child.
It’s not the love or the want that is in question, it’s the ability to provide all that is deserved. I guess that’s a little too sad to put into a 15 second sound bite about adoption.
Now, one could write off all the nasty comments as spoken by the purely ignorant. We could excuse the more negative as “out dated views” and murmur about how foolish folks “just don’t know any better”. However the fact remains that most mothers who consider adoption might often come from the “unknowing” population themselves. It is only when they find themselves facing the decision that they are indoctrinated into the glorious aspects attributed to birthmother-ness. Birthmothers are taught to think of ourselves and the action facing us in the lofty higher terms of deserving sacrifice only to reemerge into a world that did not share the bulk of that re-education.
The shell shock of that reality; being part of a world that is openly horrified and hostile at an existence that was supposedly one of elevation is quite a lot to comprehend. I am not often shocked anymore to see the world talking about my very existence out of both sides of its mouth at the very same time, but I cannot stay quiet and look the other way. It’s it not perfectly fine. It is a dastardly trick , horribly confusing and completely illogical.
The worst part is that neither side has it right anyway. We are not sinners nor saints, nor selfless or selfish. There is no definitive good or bad. Instead, birthmothers are simply flawed, imperfect human beings that find themselves in an impossible position where they face a heartbreaking and difficult position of willingly separating themselves from their child. No matter who you choose to listen to, the reality is, it is simply, a tragedy.
