Adoption Reform & Views of Orphan Angels / Deborra Lee Campaign
Hello to everyone in the Inter-Country Adoption Community!
Have you read the “Orphan Angels” website (just google them) that represents Deborra Lee’s Campaign for Adoption Reform in Australia ?
As an adoptee, I think the language used in the website needs to be challenged and questioned. As an example, the name of the website – am I the orphan and my adoptive parents the angels? Or, the “save a child” concept – what about the adoptive family who mutually benefit from adopting and the birth/natural and extended family who have lost their child legally forever? Also, the launch of Adoption Awareness week on Mother’s Day - as one adoptee pointed out, the insensitivity of this when it is the one day adoptees keenly feel the loss of their natural/birth mother.
What concerns me is the Orphan Angel campaign appears to neglect the larger picture of Inter-country adoption and its complexities, for example, the adoptees, the birth/natural families, post adoption support services that are needed for all involved! The campaign seems to promote change that benefits only the prospective adoptive parents and it appears to uphold the USA model of adoption as the end goal! The USA has only just signed up to the Hague last month and have problems with unethical adoptions due to a commercialised model of adoption!
I totally believe there is a place for ethical and well thought adoptions - done in a way that doesn’t promote child trafficking or activities that take advantage of people in unfortunate situations – done in a way that is sensitive to all parties involved. I disagree with the imbalanced perspective that only the orphaned child benefits or able to achieve their full potential through being adopted as promoted by Orphan Angels!
I totally agree that across the nation, there should be a process that is fair, equitable, and accessible to all prospective families who wish to adopt a child. It should also include comprehensive education to prospective families and the community, along with support and services after the child arrives and into the child’s life time. I also believe we do need Adoption Awareness educational events that challenge societal adoption attitudes, misconceptions, and judgements to ease the identity issues adoptees face as they grow up.
As a well informed Inter-Country Adoption community, let’s not stand by and allow this type of campaign to have the Government’s full support without advocating for changes to be done in a way that represents a more balanced perspective of inter-country adoption? Please help us tell the Government what you think of Deborah Lee’s “Orphan Angel” campaign and what you believe Adoption Reform should include to ensure all voices in the Australian adoption community are heard.
For your views to be included in a collation that will be given to the Attorney General and Prime Minister, please add your comments to this Blog. You can remain anonymous or include your name. Alternatively, you can email me directly at icasn@bigpond.net.au
(I’ve chosen to delete many of the comments, almost 60, posted by the same computers, including the majority purporting to come from Deborra-lee & Janine)!
Kind Regards
Lynelle Beveridge
Founder/Director
Inter-Country Adoptee Support Network (ICASN)
www.icasn.org/
email: icasn@bigpond.net.au
Mobile : +61 411 126 427
Post: PO Box 6550, Baulkham Hills, NSW 2153 Australia
As an adoptee, I’ll point out what I hated the most in the “Orphan Angels” website.
1) “ Adoption will only ever be a partial solution for the homeless and abandoned children of the world - its no panacea. I wish I had the answer to the social & economic injustices that leads to so many birth parents simply not being able to raise their own children” ….Debborra-Lee Furness
I hate this because unlike the person who made a comment before me, I was not an orphan before adoption but ADOPTION MADE AN ORPHAN OF ME. I had a father, a real father who loved me but the day I was shipped to a foreign country for the purpose of adoption I lost my dad and I became an orphan (because some people believed that a child is better with some rich strangers in a foreigh country than it’s real parent in it’s birth country)
2) ”these children overseas will face a better future in a loving family in Australia than living on the street or in an orphanage in their country of origin..” The Committee on Family & Human Services
I hate that one too. I found my siblings 27 years after my adoption. My eldest sister is rich, very rich. My 2nd sis who was homeless had the better futur: she is poor but she has a husband, kids, family in law, birth culture, birth language, real identity.
By contrast, I wasn’t homeless but today, I have nothing, not even an adoptive family member, nothing except what the adoption wanted to give me: a language and culture which are the results of a forced assimilation, an identity made by adoption industry.
Adoption killed my (birth) dad.
It is interesting how a different and important perspective gets the following comments. You would think it was an attack directly on DL herself.
- You are WRONG!!! and appear vindictive…
- HOW DARE YOU jeopardise the momentum…
- Your negativity is your issue- others have moved on
- Your comments were just bitchy !
- very unimpressive - cant you all just see the big picture !
- ungrateful and angry
- this just looks like tall poppy stuff….
- What are you trying to incite here ?
- are you crazy ?
- That is so misrepresentative ! This is liablous !
- no doubt she has Big Hollywood Lawyers and I feel what — you are saying and inferring is potentially dangerous territory
It is unquestionable that everyone in the adoption community is happy that DL has raised the profile but …… Lets face it! Not everyone agrees with her ‘American Dream’ for adoption.
It is a pity that someone with such a high profile appears ignorant and naive to important wider adoption issues.
DL for the sake of your campaign …. Please get educated!
RESPONSE FROM DEBORRA-LEE
LYNELLE
Here we go again.
I have read your recent attack on my efforts to initiate reform within a
government system that has been severely lacking for decades.
Again I will address your ill informed statements of what ORPHAN ANGELS is
about.
Firstly as I stated previously ,my priority and of those also involved with
the group is about providing a family who will nurture and care for a child
that has been abandoned by either war, disease, poverty or unforseen
circumstances. WEBSTERS DICTIONARY … ORPHAN … A person who is deprived
of parents by either death or desertion.
As an adoptee you no longer fit that category, obviously. Also the word
orphan does not describe the child it describes their journey.
And the angels part of the name is up for interpretation, you can pick what
works for you. I have heard there has been exception to the terminology of
SAVE THE CHILDREN, can you explain to me what part of that is offensive when
you can see an infant who is left by a roadside or a 2 year old that is
roaming the streets with no possible way of fending for themselves and that
if there is someone that can come to their rescue, why is that a problem
saying that they are saving a child from the alternative … Which could be
left to die. A soldier that is lying bleeding in a field of battle and a
comrade drags them to safety, would that not be considered saving that
soldier. Arent we all in society trying to save each other in some way or
other, by stepping up to the plate and assisting those who need help.
That brings me to the other word that seems to cause friction which is
HUMANITARIAN. I do see facilitating bringing a child to safety as
humanitarian. The act of being humane should be something to be revered by
us all, and to be practiced daily in everyday life towards our fellow man.
You have continually harped on that we are only about the adoptive parents
rights, which is categorically not where we are coming from. When I began
this journey, what motivated me was to be able to assist the kids who needed
to be helped and I saw addressing the system as a way to make this happen.
Along the way I discovered the injustice and the lack of care and energy put
into INTERCOUNTRY ADOPTION and how badly people were being treated within
the system. This was not a priority for our government and meanwhile
children were being left behind, either to die or to be institutionalised
for their entire childhood. I want you to be clear on this point once and
for all, as you keep regurgitating this misinformed statement.
ORPHAN ANGELS is by no means neglecting the larger picture of inter-country
adoption and I have addressed a lot of the points you mention, I am fully
aware of the big picture but one needs to get in the door before hitting
them with requests. Journalists are not interested in the minutae of
details when telling their story. My intention was to bring awareness to
the issue and make politicians and the general public sit up and take
notice, then having their full attention hit them with what is needed.
We are not just upholding the USA MODEl of ICA, I have just stated in my
interviews that their system is far more eficient in processing than ours.
Why are prospective adoptive couples in australia waiting up to 8 years for
a child when I know there are millions of abandoned children wanting a home.
We would never support unethical adoptions and expect due dilligence to be
in place and that would be part of the governments job to ensure that this
would be taken care of.
I agree that both adoptive parents and the adopted child both benefit, so it
is a win/win situation. One could see that as both parties being saved.
I couldn’t agree more that post-adoptive services be in place, I have
already stated that.
In regard to our AWARENESS WEEK being close to mothers day, it is not being
launched on mothers day it is shortly after and we were given that date by
the powers that be due to other campaigns throughout the year already having
other available dates.
Finally, I would just like to state that by you initiating this attack on
the work we are doing you are creating a civil war within the community,
this will only hold up momentum to move forward in a positive way.
It creates more negativity and beurocracy that everyone has been dealing
with for years on the other side.
If you stood back and looked at the big picture I think you would see that
We all want the same thing. Orphan Angels is not the bad guy, everyone
involved has good intention and wants what is best for “the child”.
I am shocked that you can come to me for help in connecting with my very
dear friend jane aronson, whose organisation is called ORPHAN RANGERS and
invite me to your event and then you turn around and stab me in the back.
By the way I did send your request to jane as even though we had disagreed
in the past I looked at the big picture and not my personal agenda in the
hope of achieving a good outcome for the issue.
I ask you to reconsider your campaign of trying to enlist people to deter
our efforts for the benefit of a greater outcome for the kids.
Sincerely
DEBORRA-LEE
wow
adoption is quite emotive
i can see why and having read about the process to adopt from overseas, with the home study and all whewww.
I’m a Viet adoptee and an MA student looking at adoptees as artists.that aside.
we all need to take a step back
we all need to sit and discuss the issues at hand
as a reflection of how things and go heywire is the US
Viet Nam adoption program now in limbo, why? no one is facing the FACTS as they stand. everyone is worried about losing face.
The peak body is a golden opportunity to sit and go through the issues, step by step. State by state, program by program.
Listen to all voices in the triangle. balance all professional views.
Lets devise a system which meets the needs of the children, parents and birth families and cross cultural concerns.
wow
adoption is an emotive issue
lets get it right
listen all voices in the triangle and all professional views
lets get the peak body to up hold the rights for all concerned parents, children, birth families.
lets not make the mistake both the US and Viet Nam is making by not talking and saving face.
viet adoptee and MA student @ monash uni
Well, if you can keep it in Queensland, the rest of us might be happier. The name Orphan Angels is sentimental and demeaning to our children - many of whom are relinquished or abandoned. (Talk about picking the dictionary with the definition that best suits your argument - try a few more dictionaries - orphan = death of birth family)
But worse, being a fan of Deborah Lee does not mean you cannot listen to the voices of people who were once the cute babies we are all trying to adopt.
Adopted babies grow up into real people and those of us who HAVE adopted owe it to our children to hear what adult intercountry adoptees think. We certainly should not be attacking them for their views. I wonder if you will have the same approach with your adopted children when they ask “difficult” questions??
Ms. Lynelle Beveridge has pointed out a very important issue. I find her posting very mature and eligible. Her concerned is shared by many adoptees worldwide.
I do not believe that such postings as I encountered here will develop any dialogue or framework to meet each other in any way. Criticism and a different point of view might develop another perspective and therefore probably a foundation to search for further reasoning.
But staring to attack people at personal level as human being by so-called emotional attacks is unworthy to handle or to respond to.
I found Ms. Beveridge her posting about Ms. Lee’s website absolutely necessary and do favor her for doing that. Many of these websites and adoption lobby work has been done over the years and any withstand from adult adoptees has been countered in the way we she here today again.
But we from the UAI support Ms. Lynelle Beveridge her work and efforts. Also in this case. She and ICASN has proven to be reliable partners in the Adult Adoption scene and they put a step forward to contribute to history of ICA and write in this way the so important anthologies to complete and shape the landscape of international adoption as the way it should be.
The remarks left on this blog - especially the anonymous ones - should consider the real question in this case. Is adoption a last resort or a facility ? According to an independent law panel in Europe;
Intercountry adoption (ICA) cannot be considered as a protection measure….Adoption is not a facility but should be a last resort of providing real orphans a permanent home. For other children we need to see upon strict and protected environment and regulations without focusing on adoption alone. Children need homes, but not because of adults want them to have one.
The UAI strives for this position and we are very concerned about the ones in the world who are daring to neglect the importance of ICA from this stance. ICASN and the UAI are partners from this point of view.
We are willing to argue the interest of people and organizations who are not willing to protect the most vulnerable ones and their families. And take the interest for those ones as first.
Sincererly,
Hilbrand W.S. Westra BSc MA
Chairman of United Adoptees International
It saddens me that there are still people who fail to understand that adoption is not an appropriate solution for children in need of care. I can assure you, having travelled to many countries and met with those who have experienced adoption separation and professionals involved in post-adoption counselling, that Australia is envied by other countries because we are close to eliminating adoption and replacing it with truly child-centred alternatives. Thankfully, there is an international community of people who do not tire of trying to educate the world around the long term outcomes of adoption separation. We are also trying to educate our politicians. It is clear that the battle against ignorance must continue for the sake of children who are at risk. My thanks to all of those who are working tirelessly to bring an end to adoption and to see it replaced by alternative strategies which will benefit children in need without the damaging outcomes which have resulted from adoption.
Evelyn Robinson
http://www.clovapublications.com
I find it amazing that so many of the posts all have the same writing style (but maybe that is caused by the handheld devices and using the same server rather than it being the same person posting)
I have just got home to read a pile of negative and attacking responses to a serious, genuine issue. As an adoptive parent I am very concerned about the negative language, and lack of perspectives in this campaign, and the effect this will have on our children.
Lynelle is not ‘spoiling’ the hard work done, or splitting the adoption community. Yes we need adoption reform in this country, for many reasons. However if this adoption awareness campaign is allowed to go ahead as is, we will be going backwards (as far as our children are concerned – or do we just want to make the adoption process quicker and easier with no regard of the impact on our children???
We need somebody educated in adoption issues to add some perspectives to this campaign – for Debora to work with these educated people, not attack them. We can start with losing the title ‘Orphan Angels’, and ensuring the needs of all members of the adoption triad are in the mission – not just ‘saving’ children! (Please – ask an adoptee who has lost their birth mum, family and culture – they feel far from being saved!).
Language is powerful, we are not just talking about ‘words’. All we are asking is that these ‘words’ are changed – with input from educated, experienced people – so that we can then go on with looking into adoption reform from a balanced educated perspective.
Please – some of these comments are ridiculous – do we really want to go ahead with this just so Rudd can save face with a few celebs – at the expense of our children’s social and emotional development?
Cheers,
Donna
, ORPHAN ANGELS (temporary site) Orphan Angels was originally formed …Janine Weir President. Mark Byrne “Peak Body” Representative. Catherine de Leede. Cora Doody. Tony Dunne Pres - IAFQ ( Intl Adpt Families Qld ) …
web.mac.com/brucecook4/Site/Who_We_Are.html - 12k - Cached - Similar pages
So a google on Janine Weir is incorrect then?
Lets talk to google …. don’t they misrepresent!
http://web.mac.com/neenweir/Site/Who_We_Are.html
so it moved from Bruce Cook 4 to Janine Weir
Lynelle,
I think that yours is a well thought out, reasoned response to something that has been concerning to me as an adoptive parent. Orphan Angels do not have a mandate to speak for all adoptive families and most certainly do not speak for mine - most especially after the vindictive response(s?) that you have received today from that group.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion of course and OA can take whatever tack they want so long as they recognise that they do NOT speak for all families.
I have already written to the AG to express my reservations about the presence of Ms Furness at the opening session of the peak body. With the best will in the world, it seems to me inappropriate to have a non-member present at a time when the group are meeting each other for the first time. If there are to be “extras”, then there are many who I would consider more appropriate to invite than someone who in spite of the claims, had no role in establishing the body - Bronwyn Bishop springs to mind.
I was very glad to see your name on the list of those appointed to the peak body Lynelle. By and large I think that we will be well served by those who have been nominated for this group and wish them every success and support for their roles - one for which they have been selected rather than self-appointed.
Jan
Hi All,
Great news. As many may have by now, the long awaited Baby Bonus changes.
With many of the news stories lacking details, here is a summary directly from the Budget website. http://www.budget.gov.au/2008-09/content/overview/html/overview_25.htm
Baby Bonus
On 1 July 2008, the Baby Bonus will be
increased to $5,000 and indexed annually.
From 1 January 2009, the Baby Bonus will be:
• only available where family income is not greater than $75,000 in the six months from the birth of a child (annualised $150,000), indexed annually
• paid in fortnightly instalments over six months for all recipients
• available to parents who adopt children under 16 years of age
Lynelle,
As always thankyou for your thoughts & raising these issues.
And Donna, if you are not on the peak body you should be.
I couldn’t agree more.
To Comment #21
Intercountry Adoption 21st Century is way different to ICA in 1975
To comment # 42
Nor does OA profess to represnt all.
Wow, so much emotion! Yes, it is a very emotional issue. Well, here are my thoughts and feelings about adoption and I don’t think some here are going to like it but you should hear it. I will not be dispassionate as I feel strongly about this issue and some of the attitudes I see expressed.
Two things come to mind. One, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Two, there are none so blind (deaf) as those who will not see (hear).
From reading most of the entries here I get the feeling that Deborah and her supporters would rather that those who have had negative experiences with adoption (and there are far too many either as mothers forced to give up their child or the child that was taken) would just shut the **** up and let others (better qualified?) speak for them. Their story is not pretty and without the happily ever after ending. It would seem that some here would rather it not be spoken of in good company least the powers that be get the wrong impression about adoption and you don’t get your wish for one of your very own. Well, Deborah and supporters too many women and children (and some fathers) have had no voice for far too long. How dare you tell them to be quiet and not rock the boat least they disrupt your plans for the latest accessory in your life or for a reason to feel self righteous. I’ve seen many of Deborah’s dismissive and cold replies to mothers and children who were forcibly taken away from each other and who do not share the same view as her and her supporters. She had made her mind up and that is that. Her mind (and heart) seems well and truly closed to the experience of others and open only to those who support her ideas on adoption.
In reading a lot of these blog entries I see and hear a bunch of privileged middle class types complaining about delayed gratification. Very few are thinking outside the square. Now, I know that you are all good people in your different ways and in your eyes you may think of your self adopting (rescuing) foreign babies like some of the brave souls in Nazi Europe who rescued the Jews. But to others like myself I see you differently - more like the efficient administrator developing a better time table for the trains where ever they may travel to. Apparently Deborah and her husband attended the birth of their adopted child(ren) and even cut the umbilical cord. I imagine for Deborah and her husband that this is a cherished memory. However, this image horrifies me. The presumptiveness of these foreigners being in another country in the presence of another persons birth and actually severing the physical and most primal and symbolic of bonds between a mother and her child and presuming to make it theirs fills me with repulsion. My heart goes out to this mother and child for the gross insensitivity and intrusion of this disrespectful act by the Australians present. I understand that the mother later committed suicide. How will that child feel about this when they grow up? Will they even be told? Another happily ever after adoption story.
Families need to be able to stay together. We heard that from someone who suffered from having their family torn apart when our Prime Minister gave the apology to the stolen generation. It is a basic human right to have a mother and a father and a family and a culture of one’s own. I am not opposed to adoption in any circumstances. There will always be some that are necessary. But the first place to look is to the biological parents. What sort of assistance can be offered to keep parents and child together? Housing? Income? Safety? All these have solutions other than adoption (especially trans-national adoption) Other family can be considered. Grandparents, aunties, cousins, siblings. Provision of free birth control and free access to safe abortions is also important in any society. The active promotion of peace and tolerance in every society. The eradication through comprehensive secular education of superstitious beliefs and destructive cultural practices (Vatican roulette anyone?)The social redistribution of wealth from the top down. All of these things we can actively do now both here and abroad. We must all be part of the solution. Instead of adopting a baby adopt a whole family or village. Go and live there instead of bring the baby here. Meet the child’s needs not your own.
I do feel sad for the couples who for what ever reason cannot have their own children. Get a cat or dog if you like and move on. (this has been said to birth mothers by some Orphan Angel supporters) You have no right to anyone else’s children. Involve yourself with children from your own extended family. Try fostering a child. What about a child no one wants like a severely disabled child? No need to go overseas for that.
The Orphan Angels web site is pretty awful and one sided and the Adoption ‘celebration’ day so close to Mothers day is a cruel insult to all of the birth mothers and children. I don’t care that some poobah in the public service chose that day. No one is forced to take their poisoned offer. Ditch it if you have any compassion for these mothers and children. Open your hearts to the experiences of others. Many people here need much more ‘awareness’ education about adoption issues before they go around trying to preach to others. Adoption is nothing to celebrate. It is a last resort at best and something that we should all be working hard to eliminate from human experience.
Thank you for raising these concerns. While the Orphan Angel (hate that name!)campaign raises public awareness of soem of the issues in Austeralias adoption system, it does not target the adoptive community correctly. Although they have the right intentions they seem to be ignoring the input of those of us in the community who have repeatedly offerred help & insights into the realities & issues needing urgent attention.
While they have got media exposue, it doesnt really say anything substantial or anything that will actually motivate the government to act.
The recent petition by another group clearly outlined the way forward & was more logiacal & encompassing of the adoption communities needs.
Unfortunatly the Orphan Angels campaign seems to be all about celebrity. What a pity the government listens to those who havent even been through the sytem, no matter how well meaning they may be. It’s great that Deborah Lee is trying to get some movement but she really should take direction from those who really know what is going on.
It seems that International Adoption has become a very emotive issue. One of the problems that I see is that this discussion has so many different facets and the outcomes for every individual will determine their view on the bigger picture.
A generation ago the orphan’s situation was a very different one from today. Australia’s history with dealing with the issue is very poor, and I believe that this is what is clouding the picture now. I grew up with a brother who was from a different race from me and I saw a lot of damage in his life. The difference between now and the 1960’s + 70’s is that you have to go through very comprehensive checks and education before you can adopt. Also, parents are made aware of the importance of their children’s birth culture and I have seen many doing a wonderful job of keeping their children in touch.
Today, when we talk of orphans, we are not necessarily talking about children who have one or two parents who for whatever reason choose not to be active parents. We can also be talking about children who will never experience their own culture because they have no living relative who can support, care for or teach them. I believe that every child’s best interests are served by being brought up by blood relatives (providing they are not abusive), however, this is not going to be a reality for many millions of children today.
I recommend that you get a hold of Neely Tucker’s book “Love in the driest season”. It just gives a different perspective on the whole issue.
I read a UNICEF report where the writer was expressing great concerns for the AIDS orphans in Sub-Saharan Africa. These children are often growing up as streets kids, with no idea about society or relationship. Their life is often framed by violence and theft, just to survive. Many don’t survive.
I am not saying that IA is a way of ’saving’ these children. I am just saying that for many International Adoptees today, the picture is different to what it was a generation ago.
Growing up in an orphanage is not a way to experience your culture. I have a friend who grew up that way, and he is still damaged in his 50’s from the experience of having had no parental love and no life outside an institution during his developmental years.
There is no easy answer to the problem of IA. Some want to see it increased, some want to see it abolished. But for those who campaign to have it abolished, I feel that you need to be prepared to go to third world countries and work towards a solution that better serves your ideology. There is nothing gained by sitting here in Australia and dialoguing about the pro’s and con’s.
As for Orphan Angels, whether we like the name or not is irrelevant in my opinion. I think that a six year wait to become adoptive parents (the experience of some I know) does nothing to serve the best interests of families or children. If someone wants to have a voice, let them and good on them for trying to help.
Annie
Dear Lynelle
As an adoptive mother with a young daughter I support your initiative and believe that some of the comments posted DO NOT reflect the thoughts of many adoptive parents.
Not sure how the Debora Lee campaign evolved but the consultation in the lead up to the formation of this group did not seem to involve the parents of children who are cogniscent of their adoption or adult adoptees who are able to actively partake and contribute in such a campaign.
As mentioned I have a young daughter (7 yrs) who is beginning to form an opinion about her life as an adopted child and I know for her to be labled with such sentimental and inappropriate terms such as ‘Orphan Angels’ would be cause for shame for her and I do not ever want her to feel ashamed or angered by the actions of those who have chosen not to include the most important members of the adoption triad - the adoptees.
Good Luck with your upcoming meeting, here’s hoping for reform that factors in ALL of the members of the adoption triad.
Jo
Dear Lynelle
As a mother of a cherished adopted daughter I fully support your views. I believe that many of the comments posted DO NOT reflect the views of most adoptive parents. True adoption reform factors in all of the parties involved in adoption but most importantly the adoptees who had no say in their futures.
I’m not sure how the D-L ‘Orphan Angels’ campaign began and who was consulted in the lead up to the formation of this campaign but I feel sure that parents of children fully cogniscent of the circumstances that led to their adoption were not consulted just as I don’t believe that adult adoptees were consulted otherwise the negative affect of labels such as ‘Orphan Angels’ on the psyche of adoptees would have been considered.
I wish you every success at next weeks meeting and I have great hopes for a united move forward towards true adoption reform.
I had visited yesterday and saw the very nasty, personal attacks made on Lynelle and was very saddened by it, especailly as Lynelle is what another poster pointed out is the most important member of the adoption triad - an adoptee. I am very glad that today when I have time to comment, the tide seems to have turned and whether or not you agree with Lynelle or adoption or Deborra-Lee, at least the comments seem to be constructive and inclusive of many different views.
Lynelle has raised in her original posting concerns that were expressed by myself and others several weeks ago on AAC and FCC webgroups, and we too were met by many cries to shut up and not jeopardise the good work being done by Orphan Angels, however, we also received many public and private messages of support for questioning the language of this campaign and the timing too.
From my viewpoint, I too feel that mothers day (or close to it) is very insensitive to at least 2 of the 3 sides of the triad, and as a person who lost their mother through death at a young age, I can fully empathise with how adoptees may be feeling, as I feel that way myself each year on that day, a mixture of sadness and happiness, regret for those missed years and thanks for the years we had and for the great “mothering” I received from my grandmother who was effectively my mum after my mum passed away.
As far as the language is concerned I agree totally with the previous poster who pointed out that language is one of the most powerful (and hurtful) tools our society has, it is far more than just words, and people, especially people the language is applied to should have every right to object if they feel it is inappropriate, demeaning, etc. If we didn’t object to language (and the stereotypes that much language implies) then Indigenous Australians would still be called horrible names such as “Abo’s” and “Coons” and thankfully that is no longer acceptable (although unfortunately still happens), they are now known by the various names that they themselves asked to be known by, so surely Orphan Angels can listen to the feedback given not only by adoptive parents, but by adoptees themselves and take on board this constructive criticism without its supporters attacking those giving it.
Lynelle asked to hear about our vision for adoption reform, and I would say that a more balanced education campaign is what I would like to see. I have spoken to many adoptees (adult and older kids) and also have a very dear friend who is a relinquishing parent (happened at a time where no social support was available, and her parents forced her to do so) and have seen firsthand the lifelong damage that did to her, although thankfully she has found her daughter and they have a great relationship, but her daughter also still fully values her adoptive parents, who she also sees as her mum and dad.
I believe that reform of the system is needed, to make it the same across all jurisdictions, and that those reforms should include far more education of adoptive parents, and support for all sides of the adoption triad.
Lastly, I repeat the comments I made on AAC last night, and that is that I don’t feel comfortable with a self-appointed action group solely running and setting the agenda for something as important as Adoption Awareness Week, it needs more input from all those affected by adoption, that is why the Peak Body and its representatives are so important, as they were selected (often from elected representatives from support goups etc) and if anyone is going to speak for me, I prefer it to be them, and given that several members of the peak body are also involved in Orphan Angels, they will still have the opportunity to press their views and opinions, but it will be more balanced.
Thanks Lynelle for having the courage to speak out, despite the treatment you received yesterday, those views do not represent all of us in the adoptive community.
All the best,
Leah (Adoptive Mum)
Leah - You have much wisdom and insight into the real issues of many aspects of the adoption triangle - Please forward to those involved in the education process at our state levels now…Furthermore advocate that the peak body promote/advise a national education program/curriculum for prospective parents - I think that would be a wonderful addition to their list of prospective reforms.
I am optimistic that in time with open communication - we can all better understand each others point of view.
Great comments Annie. Adoption is a serious matter. Now that (at least in the west) we are over the stigma of illegitimacy, clearly the time has come to move on to maximise the advantages of adoption over institutional care and minimise the disadvantages.
It is rare to gain the attention of Honourable Senators sufficiently to result in an inquiry into one’s special subject, much less have at least some of the international aspects dealt with by means of a treaty.
It seems to me this is too good an opportunity to let it be lost by dissension within the ranks of those, who, I believe, both want to finish up substantially at the same destination. Blogs and and internet mail lists seem to be natural incubators for the expression, not so much of extreme views, but of views extremely expressed.
That being the case, can I suggest a group hug among those in the community with a view to seeking out and consolidating the opinions they share rather than emphasising those which divide: this may involve some compromises. If legislators sense dissension on a topic which does not affect the wallets of the mainstream, they will find plenty of other issues to occupy them.
It will be in the medium to long term issues of adoptive parents if the integrity of procedures on the supply side, including the role, rewarding and motivation of intermediaries, can be assured.
Richard Ure
As a recent participant at the 2020 Summit in Canberra and adoptee, I sensed that PM Kevin Rudd, his government and even the people in the Communities, Families and Social Inclusion Stream who may not ordinarily consider adoption are open to learning more about the legal, emotional and social complexities that surround the practice.
Whilst adoption never made it to the formal agenda, informal discussions on the issue were generally supportive of the idea that adopters continue to be screened carefully, and that pre-adoption education and post-adoption services be priority matters. Others suggested some proper brainstorming is also strongly needed to make the overall system more translatable, accountable and open for review. Most of all, if adoption is an option and ready for reform, we need to continue to work on developing ways to make adoptive parents become the best prepared and supported carers they can be - and to make sure adopted people have the best post-adoption services and rights driven resources in the world. I have great hopes that the Peak Body discussions will ensure this is the case.
People who know Lynelle plus members of the ‘Orphan Angels’ can be assured that all will establish and engage in some constructive discussions on adoption when they meet each other in person at the Peak Body meeting. Community debates and differences of opinion, which Lynelle should be commended for making an option, are healthy things right? All are highly dedicated and intelligent people who in their own ways, have a great deal of power to improve the system and services to existing adopted people and their families (of any age). This blog is already proving to be a great sounding board for ideas and one of the few venues necessarily highlighting people’s sensitivities and perspectives. We all need to hear each other out more often. Indigo
It is very heartening to see that the level of discussion on this forum has become much more rational today. Reading the blog yesterday, I was saddened that an attempt to stimulate discussion by Lynelle Beveridge on a topic of some debate in the adoption community quickly turned into a hotbed of vitriol. And much of this apparently from people who are supposedly compassionate adoptive parents, chosen for their ability to nurture their intercountry adopted children to healthy adulthood.
Some people clearly love the name Orphan Angels – others clearly hate it. Many people applaud its founders for their recent burst of ICA publicity; others feel that any publicity is not necessarily good publicity.
Surely these are topics that can be discussed without abuse? Especially abuse of a woman who is closer in her life experiences to our children than to ourselves?
And what about the brave folk who say that rocking the adoption boat will prevent the Peak Body achieving the goals of the Bishop Inquiry? Or those who raise the spectre of “Big Hollywood Lawyers”? This is absolute arrant nonsense and I’m sure even Ms Furness must be embarrassed to have this sort of “support” for her public goals.
The reality of intercountry adoption is that it is not (and has never been) “one-size-fits-all” – either for adoptive parents or for children.
Yes, ICA today is very different to the ICA of 30 years ago. But it is the experiences of adults like Lynelle (and many others) that have fed into the reservoir of knowledge that Australian adoptive parents benefit from nowadays, as they move through the adoption process.
Did I resent that part of the process when I was in it? Yes, absolutely. I wanted my child NOW – no, YESTERDAY!!
Did I understand that it was necessary? Absolutely not – I thought I knew all about raising children and that any fool could do it.
But I was wrong and it took the adoption of my daughter to teach me that. Suddenly, theory was reality; a real live, grieving person took the place of my fairytale, imagined daughter. Every week, if not every day, in the five years since, I have thought back to something that I learned in that much-maligned process and I am grateful that I actually heard what Lynelle and others were saying. I didn’t always like what I heard, but I was always conscious that this could be my daughter’s reality in another 20-25 years.
As one of two Victorian representatives on the Peak Body, I am confident that the adoption community can work together to achieve many of the recommendations of the Bishop Inquiry and more – an inquiry that was informed by the stories told by a range of people who have or have wanted to form families through adoption.
Some of those stories were more emotional than factual, but no-one criticised that. They were often about opinions rather than reality but they were very, very real to the people involved. And therefore valid.
The input of all these people has led to the formation of the Peak Body – nominations were called last year and the body would have been announced by the previous Attorney General had an election not been called in the middle of the process.
The current Attorney General has now appointed the Peak Body and I believe it is the hard work of many people that has led to this; not celebrity endorsement, no matter how attractive the coincidence of timing. The centralisation of adoption negotiation is yet another very welcome result of the Bishop Recommendations and I am aware that a range of other recommendations are now moving through legal or administrative processes.
As a journalist, I know how hard it is to measure the effectiveness of a media campaign, especially when you are in the middle of it. For those of us in the adoption community, the celebrity stories stand out, especially if we do not yet have our children. We are delighted to see a public champion among us, endorsing our fervent wishes to be parents, reinforcing our opinions that it all takes too long, that we are ready NOW.
But the reality is that the profile of intercountry adoption waxes and wanes with happy stories of new families and sad stories of child trafficking.
Those of us with children who are clearly adopted are probably doing more, every day, in our own communities, to build an understanding of intercountry adoption. Articles in New Idea might be icing on the cake, but do the critics trust what is written there anyway? And what other social questions were featured in the same issue of New Idea – do you remember many of them? No, probably not, because they didn’t strike the same chord that ICA strikes with us. We see the media through the lens of our own biases – and so does everyone else.
The biggest surprise to me in my whole adoption journey has been the grief that overwhelmed me when I brought my one year old daughter home, three years after I started the process. My grief was for my daughter’s birth family, but especially for her birth mother and the loss that she had suffered that actually made me a mum.
The knowledge that finding her birth mother would be next to impossible led to the awful realisation of what this would mean to my daughter throughout her life.
The recognition that adoption isn’t “saving” children from a horrible life, but offering them a loving alternative when it appears the only other option is an institution.
I give much more thought now to the circumstances that prevent children living with their birth parents and I feel terribly bad for families waiting for their babies. But the fact is, that healthy babies for intercountry adoption are in short supply .
Like most ICA parents in this country, I didn’t have the luxury of forming an adoption plan with a birth parent and taking my child home, when he or she was hours old.
I was chosen to be my daughter’s mother by a government bureaucracy that probably didn’t give much thought to the loss of her cultural heritage; the impossibility of her reuniting with birth family as an adult. I probably didn’t think deeply enough about it before I adopted her either, even though I was convinced I had. Now I do what I can to keep her connected to her birth culture and other adoptees, but that is mainly because of what we now know about the isolation that older adoptees experienced 20 years ago.
We hear there are MILLIONS of children without birth parents in this world. I am sure this is true. But are they genuinely available to be adopted? Some of them may have extended family, some live in countries that do not want their children to be adopted to Australia (or anywhere else in the West), some will be adopted locally; some have disabilities too severe for them to leave their country of birth.
Others still are chronically ill, disabled, or over seven or eight years of age and the challenge faced by their carers is to find local or Western families willing to take on this group of children, who are often in this “too hard basket”.
It isn’t appeals to politicians that will find these children families; it is the education of prospective parents and the provision of appropriate post-adoption support services that will make it possible for good people to bring these children into loving homes.
I didn’t believe those who told me at the beginning, but … love alone is not enough.
It is almost immoral to hold out untrammelled hope to first-time adoptive families that there is an inexhaustible supply of young healthy children genuinely available for adoption. Yes, there are untold numbers of children who need families and it is clear that the Federal Attorney General’s Department is now seeking to locate those children and work with their governments so that families can be found for them. Or that aid can be generated to support them in their homeland – another option that must be considered. But without proper resources for those children and their families, how do we expect people to cope?
There are many adoption support groups, theoretically all on the same side, but none of them able to speak on behalf of all adoptive parents or all adopted people.
I would urge anyone with an interest in ICA to continue to listen to voices such as Lynelle’s and not to shy away from informed debate on the topic.
It is completely unfair to say that Lynelle’s comments are creating a civil war. War indicates that both sides are entrenched in their views and determined to crush the other side. That would be an unnecessary tragedy for everyone.
It was wonderful last night to see the baby bonus being made available to children over two years when they are adopted – a long overdue amendment, brought about by a lot of letter writing to politicians. I look forward to seeing lots more good news come from the Peak Body over the coming months and years.
Aileen Berry
Far-from-perfect adoptive mother of one daughter born in China
FCC Australia Information Officer and Peak Body representative from Victoria
, Google is still pointing to web.mac.com/brucecook4/Site/Who_We_Are.html. at 1520 14/05/08
These types of changes don’t take place instantaneously.
I am sure while the intentions of post 59 were honorable I was horrified to read the intimate circumstances of a child’s disrupted adoption described in this manner, and so publicly, without their consent. I think the posting of an incorrect URL pales when compared with the invasion of this child’s privacy and I hope that that post can be removed or edited to ensure that this information is no longer accessible.
I love the comment about us all needing a group hug.
I think maybe Lynelle deliberately tried to be provactive to get good discussion. However you dont have to be a Pysch Masters to comprehend that human nature is provoked by the way you have announced this site on the web groups. Lynelle you continue with the conspiracy theory and provocation in a really barbed way. It is not worthy of the calibre of person you truly are.
If it was to provoke a good debate maybe you succeeded - but if you genuinely did this to rubbish Ms Lee & OA - and seek to get negative comments to forward to the Attorney general then you need to rethink your motives.
I have been a private social worker for over 20 years and have seen the huge contribution you, Lynelle & other Adult Adoptees have made in educating our prospective families in the various issues they must undertake.
I have also been privy to PSW training at Docs and had Janine Weir as a guest speaker - and she is truly an inspirational adoptive mother. She gives me such optimism for the future adoptive parents coming through our system . She also has been selfless in assisting families with difficuilties - re attachment and trauma.
If Janine Weir is part of Orphan Angels I think we can all relax and be safe in the knowledge that they are well intentioned. I feel that a misunderstanding of intent has occurred and you must all move on as friends and collegues.
Its ironic that Janine identified you ( Lynelle) as a person she has learnt so much from in our seminar/training.
I feel a group hug is on the horizon - if you a mature enough to remove all mention of Deborra Lee & Orphan Angels from the blog name and introduction. I think you all have much to add to the complex debate.
I have enjoyed all contributions - but would love to see the anxiety & stress removed - as I feel it can if this site is edited and refocused in line with the current healthy debate.
J PSW - over 20 years
Aileen - its wonderful to hear from you - we are so lucky in this community to have people like you on the Peak Body.
I hope all the peak body and lobby groups are of the calibre of you, Lynelle, and Janine and orphan Angels ( incldg DL).
wishing you all much success !
- dont be deterred by the venting earlier !
Aileen Berry’s post (number 62) is to be applauded. Thank goodness for the insight, clarity and balance of such thoughtful and kind people who are also adoptive parents.
Aside from this, it is important to address the matter of the very recent history of Intercountry adoption in Australia, since this small but important history appears of late to have been re-written – particularly on this BLOG. This matter is important since it would seem that Deborra-Lee Furness is now widely credited, and if not her then the new Rudd Government – or both, with changing the face of Intercountry adoption in Australia. Not so.
Early in 2005, the then House of Representatives Standing Committee on Family and Human Services chaired by the Honourable Bronwyn Bishop MP, resolved that it would hold an inquiry into Intercountry adoption. As the foreword to the report, tabled in Parliament on 1 November 2005 states, “Members of the committee had originally envisaged a relatively short inquiry simply comparing state, territory and Commonwealth provisions and benefits”. It is understood by many people outside Parliament not privy to the approaches to the Committee about the topic, that there was considerable pressure at that time on certain politicians to address the inequities for adoptive families as compared with families in which the children are born, to access family benefits. And rightly so.
Mrs Bishop goes on in the forward to say in essence, that as the Committee began its inquiry, it quickly became obvious that there were many more issues that required its attention. Thus the Committee canvassed the many matters addressed in its 27 recommendations.
Following the tabling of the report, it was the responsibility of the HOWARD government to respond, as a government must to all Parliamentary committee reports. It did so within the required time and agreed to most, but not all the recommendations.
Chief among the recommendations since it was recommendation one, was that the Attorney-General renegotiate with the states and territories the Commonwealth-State Agreement for the Implementation of the Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Cooperation in respect of Intercountry Adoption. This Agreement, which has been in place since Australia ratified the Hague Convention in 1998, sets out the relative roles and responsibilities of the Australian Government and the state and territory governments in the conduct of Intercountry adoption in Australia.
This recommendation has been carried out. The renegotiation is completed. It took over a year, but it is done. Not withstanding the fact that this and all the recommendations arose from the evidence put to the Committee, including that of prospective adoptive and adoptive parents, this recommendation and its successful carrying out is down to the House Standing Committee, not Deborra-Lee Furness or the Sunday Telegraph newspaper or the Rudd Government (remember that this report was tabled on 1 November 2005). It is also down to those public servants, who are constantly called “anti-adoption” who worked hard to ensure it was progressed in each state and territory and also down to those equally hard working public servants in the new Australian Central Authority.
Another significant recommendation of the Bishop inquiry is the one frequently referred to in this BLOG: the Peak Group. Recommendation 27 states:
The Attorney-General’s Department establish a program to fund:
· a national peak overseas adoption support group; and
· that such national peak body be responsible for distributing small to medium grants to local adoption groups to carry out the identified essential support function.
This recommendation was partially accepted by the Howard Government – the first bit. After a lot of work on the part of public servants and people in the adoption community, a list of names for the membership of this group was about to be put to the then Attorney-General when Prime Minister Howard announced that the federal election was to be held. As always happens at this point, the Caretaker Conventions were put in place and the matter was put on hold awaiting the new Attorney. Once Mr McClelland was in place and ready to consider the recommendations for membership, he agreed and the announcement was made on 30 March this year about the establishment of the group and the composition of its membership. Of course he took the credit for its establishment. That’s only natural. But it was not down to him, Deborra-Lee Furness or anyone other than the House Standing Committee due to its recommendation 27 and the people who made it happen outside and inside all governments with lots of good will, well before the federal election.
It is of further import to detail here the TERMS OF REFERENCE of the National Peak Overseas Adoption Support Group. They are:
· Provide advice on intercountry adoption matters referred by the Attorney-General or the Attorney-General’s Department,
· Provide advice to the Attorney-General or the Attorney-General’s Department on issues of relevance to the intercountry adoption community as identified by the Group, in consultation with the intercountry adoption community, and
· Inform the intercountry adoption community of the issues being considered by the Group, where appropriate.
It is not a “reform group”; it is not a “lobby group”; it is not our great shot at changing Intercountry adoption in Australia forever. It is the National Peak Overseas Adoption Support Group. It is about a structural connection between the Australian Government system and a peak support group. Its genesis and establishment have nothing to do with Deborra-Lee Furness, the Sunday Telegraph, Orphan Angels or anyone other than the key people who were involved in actually making it happen. Not the people who came AFTER it happened.
That people should first forget the facts or not bother about finding them out or if you will, forget history or not even bother about it, and then recklessly rewrite history and perhaps even write themselves into it, is the cause of many things wrong with the world. We must remember how adoption got be where it is today. It got here through history. It often got here through a history that people would rather forget about or rewrite.
Don’t do that anymore.
I also really worry that you are wasting precious time on semantics – wood for the trees and all that. PLEASE can’t we all stay focused on the big issues and make the most of the opportunity that DLF has brought us, regardless of whether she/OA expresses it exactly the ‘right’ way (and who’s the judge on that anyway)? As long as her/their intentions are good and true, what does it really matter how it’s framed – 99% of the audience are only gleaning the overall message, and not mulling over the minutae to ascertain its political correctness etc. I can’t remember another time when inter-country adoption has had as much press coverage; I know many people have been working tirelessly for years and will continue to do so (and I constantly give heart-felt thanks for their commitment to the cause), but DLF seems to have enabled the community real and worthwhile momentum that should be harnessed. I don’t want to find in a month or three that adoption reform is ‘old news’ (again) and that the politicians have moved onto the next big thing, and that we’re kicking ourselves that we wasted this opportunity to be heard, by squabbling over he-said, she-said rubbish.
I also don’t understand your concerns about any actual/perceived link to Mothers Day (I don’t think it WAS tied into Mothers Day was it? More just a May thing?). Either way, life with kids just hurtles by, but Mothers Day (and other ‘big’ events like Fathers Day, Christmas etc) is one of the few times in each year that I really truly pause, take stock and deeply reflect on how adoption has impacted our family, but also am reminded of the enormous loss my beautiful boy and his bio parents/family have suffered and the huge responsibility and obligation I have to them all to do my utmost to make the most of this difficult and multi-faceted situation that we’re all in. I feel more connected to them at those times than any other and surely that’s only a good and constructive thing?
I’ve also had personal experience in being badly mis-quoted in the press and have learnt-by-doing that no matter how carefully and exactly you frame your words and sentiments they will always (ALWAYS) be lost/skewed when they’re re-produced in the media (all forms – even face-to-camera interviews are cut into ridiculous sound-bites to suit a particular story). And when I cringe and try to explain exactly what I meant to my family, friends, workmates etc they think I’m mad to be fussing and fretting when they’ve just had their eyes and hearts opened to an issue that they rarely if ever have the time/motivation to contemplate in more than a passing way. Don’t shoot the messenger….
PLEASE let’s unite and get on with it…..for the sake of all of us, young and old, adopted and adoptive, celebrity and otherwise.
From my daughter I have learnt so many things and I ponder the sort of insular person I may have been otherwise.
I used to view fluffy article on adoption as just that. Today I have a broader view. I now ascertain why she sees those same articles and celebrates them. Now I am grateful for any article on adoption.Certainly at the moment we have had many more than for a long time - probably because of the medias interest in Celebrity Adoption. I am just warning you all to not be as dismissive as I once was.I
For every single picture of an obvious trans racial adoptee in a family unit - celebrity or otherwise - puffs her chest out.
I now realise that she longs to see more families just like hers. I now realise that just because I pursue a higher level of journalistic response - that other levels give her a chance to celebrate her difference in her own little way.
She now has many articles laminated and scrapped - where the journalism is less than satisfactory.The are adhered to her bedroom wall, taken to school, shown to her girlfriends.
My daughters sense of sameness - as viewed in the junk press gives her a real sense of pride.It is by no means her only source - she attends Chinese school on weekends and we have a wonderful adoptive support community.
I now dont allow myself to be so scathing of journalists who seek that filler story. I subscribe to more Adoptive Magazines - but its not had that same response.
I am now searching for those visuals that she enjoys. I also am more active in rallying to assist more families to become adoptive parents. When a fluffy article occurs - I have more of those curious dscussions with strangers and if just one more family in our area also considers undertaking the rigour of the application process for our ICA - that will make my daughter even more joyous.
Sometime it is those very articles that prompt people to consider adoption. Please be more open minded and as your children grow up you may wish there were more fluffy articles with happy adoptive families looking back at your children as well.
Thank you your words really “hit the spot”….you said it all.
,My previous comment…of Thank you.your words really hit the spot….is referring to Anonymous 49……your words reflect my thoughts……
Post # 49.
You have no crediblity at all in this debate when you suggest..
” All these have solutions other than adoption (especially trans-national adoption) Other family can be considered. Grandparents, aunties, cousins, siblings. Provision of free birth control and free access to safe abortions is also important in any society”
… abortion an alternative to adoption ?????
Dear poster No. 85,
I am not sure if your whole post is directed to me or just one or two points. It is unclear to me.
As for Deborah and her husband being at the birth of the child they adopted and the later suicide of the birth mother this is on the public record. I see no particular reason to keep this a secret given that it is not. There has been far too much secrecy regarding adoption to start with. But most crimes are done in secrecy. Sorry that you find it ‘nasty’. I too find many things here and in life ‘nasty’. I could paraphrase your own post “For those that dont like a website (posting) - visit another and get over it” but I will leave that to you as these are your words. I will not be quiet and I will not keep your secrets. These are my words.
You say “Be open to all not dismissive an arrogant.” but look at your own post - ‘get over it’ - ‘If you dont like the timing of NAA - find another date and have biological mothers loss day or awareness week of your own..’ Talk about dismissive and arrogant. Mothers and their children who tell us of their unending grief and pain and loss and how adoption has destroyed their lives have too often been told by well meaning people ‘get over it’ ‘move on’ ‘its for the best’ ‘forget it’ ‘move somewhere else and start a new life’ etc. etc. etc.
Once again, I will say that two things come to mind reading some of these postings. One, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Two, there are none so blind (deaf) as those who will not see (hear). We feel your pain. Why don’t you feel others pains? Some people here just don’t ‘get it’ and probably never will with eyes wide shut. (not to mention minds and hearts)
The Orphan Angels website is a site for developing a ‘pro-adoption’ culture. They say so themselves - “…to help create a pro adoptive culture & ensure families made
through adoption is “mainstream” in Australia…” Now this may sound absolutely wonderful to you and others (maybe those adoptive parents who have personally benefited or hope to). To others it is appalling. It represents the destruction of families and communities. OA wants to make access to children quicker and easier for the adopting parents as if they have a right to other people’s children! Of course families who adopt should be ‘mainstream’ in the sense that they should not be stigmatized like illegitimacy was (is) but they should not be mainstream in the sense of 2.3 adopted children for every infertile family. Families should just be families no matter how they come together.
There was a woman who died the other day in Poland. http://www.smh.com.au/text/articles/2008/05/13/1210444435389.html
At great risk to herself she (and some others but not many) saved about 2500 children from the Warsaw ghetto from certain death. She and the parents of these children did all that they could do under the circumstances. She kept the names of all these children so that they could be reunited with their families after the war. I know that everyone here would want to do what this woman did and those who helped her. I am not being ‘vindictive’ as you seem to say. I am not a vindictive person. My general point is that wouldn’t it have been better for all concerned to have prevented the circumstances of the rise of the 3rd Reich instead of being quiet and comfortable because you are benefiting from a system or at the very least don’t see it as a problem as it doesn’t seem to touch you personally? Isn’t it better to deal with the fundamental issues of poverty, war, lack of education, superstitious beliefs, and class and caste and patriarchal systems, all the things that put unnecessary pressures on families and communities and countries rather than to sit back smug and comfortable in one’s middle class cocoon and choosing not to notice the clear connection between the two? I know that even if all that was achieved there will still be adoptions. But not very many thankfully (certainly not millions) and only as a very last resort. Personally, I don’t want my children to grow up in a world where other people have no choice but to give their children to others to raise. I want all families to have choices, not just mine. I want them to have security, safety, education, stability, access to quality health care and housing, employment and control over their lives in general. I’m not going to sit there and do nothing about it either. Nor am I going to ‘celebrate’ adoption. I want to eradicate it. That I can celebrate.
I suggest that people watch a movie (or read William Styron’s book of same name) called ‘Sophie’s Choice’ with Meryl Streep. Some choices are no choice at all.
Peace to you.
Poster number 49
Poster 49 / 88
many of the things you raise are valid but like nearly all “anti-adoption” people you miss the point…. many orphans dont have parents - they were abandoned - NOT taken or their parents are DEAD!
No.88 .
Attitudes like yours towards abortion - have meant that your desire to eradicate local adoption (at least)in Australia is almost a reality!
The truely caring option would be to not have parentless children and to celebrate that ALL children have a mother & father.
Dear poster numbers 86 and 87,
I did not say that abortion is a ‘better alternative’ to or ‘better than’ adoption. I said “Provision of free birth control and free access to safe abortions is also important in any society.” I did not say it was compulsory. Nor do I say it is compulsory to carry an unwanted pregnancy to full term. It is not for me to tell a woman what she should or should not do with her body. That is her choice alone. Hopefully, it will be a fully informed and consensual choice as in any case she will have to live with that decision and any repercussions forever. I have yet to meet a woman who has ever chosen to have an abortion with out great personal soul searching. Personally, I believe it better not to be in that position where these decisions need to be made. I would prefer that women be fully educated about their bodies, sex and fertility and how it all works. That way they can be in control of their fertility and choose when and whether to have children. However this is not always possible. Some times women are uneducated about their body and contraception (and other things). Sometimes they have no control over the actions of men using them for sex. Sometimes they have superstitious beliefs that to prevent a pregnancy is a sin. Sometimes contraception fails. When an unwanted pregnancy is a reality I believe that safe medical abortion is one option for women. Free access to contraception is another important choice for women (and men). I do not believe it right to impose my moral or religious dogma on to others and I would not wish any one to do that to me. It is a serious decision and one that only a woman in that situation can make. She may choose to continue with the pregnancy and to adopt the child as you did. And that is your choice and it can be any womans choice. But you can’t be compelled to have an abortion, have a pregnancy, be denied contraception or give up a child by other’s attitudes about whether it is right or wrong. That decision belongs to the woman alone. Not you and not me.
Poster number 49
I am writing again to highlight to some members of the adoption community out there who seem to believe that the language used in this campaign is nothing to be concerned about - as long as we get media attention who cares what language we use etc.
The lengthy wait the adoption process brings, is an ideal time to ‘read up’ on the issues of ICA. In a way, we are fortunate that there are now older ICA adoptees that can share their experiences of the situation that WE put them in: growing up as a minority race/ethnic group/adoptee in a western culture, with (in most cases) white parents (having many more implications than minority races/ethnic groups of non-adopted children growing up within same race families in western cultures). We are fortunate that there is so much academic research available, to understand the implications our ICA children face. The issues of identity resolution (on top of the normal identity development children have to face) are there for us to learn, from adoption professionals, social workers, psychologists and older adoptees (who contribute both academically and personally). There are too many resources out there to quote in this short post, and many academic papers are only available to people with university database access. But as an example, there is a book available to all people ‘The Handbook of Adoption’ (2007) – a collection of research papers (editor Rafael A. Javier) which can be a start for reading into the implications of ICA on our children (The book has a bigger emphasis on adoptees and birth mothers than adoptive parents – a shift much needed – but is written for adoption professionals, adoptive families and practitioners).
A common issue that adoptees write about, and what research is telling us, is the identity issues our children face as a result of adoption attitudes, misconceptions, and judgements in our community. I spent my first degree studying how the Australian Identity has been cultured. Simply put, the attitudes the community forms about issues (in this case adoption) depend on the messages that are sent and received within our culture. Unfortunately adoption has pretty negative connotations in our society. It has been a ‘taboo’ topic a few decades ago – so much so that it was advised never to tell or talk about adoption. Movies and literature have portrayed orphans as either ‘saved’ into wealthy fairy tale homes, or mixed up psychopaths ready to seek revenge. Hence, people unaware of the truths of adoption can burden these myths onto our children (in perceived realistic degrees of course). People are so curious of ICA children, and seem to want to give their often misguided opinion (right in front of our children) about how lucky they are that they were ‘saved’, or that whatever ‘issues’ our children have must be because they were adopted. It is FACT that these negative connotations affect our children’s development. Most adoptees would tell you that having to deal (at different stages of their development) with the loss of their birth mother, family and culture, whilst constantly receiving messages from their community as being ‘saved’ and ‘lucky’ causes for identity confusion. A basic psychology lesson would tell you the implications of this. This is just one example of a myriad of similar misconceptions our children have to deal with. (Backed up by research).
I do not have room here to go into the finer details of cultural construction. But I need to explain that the adoption community has been trying for a long time to work out ways to deal with the subsequent ignorant attitudes loaded onto our children. Adoptive parents (going through shock, anger, and upset at having to deal with such comments) are trying to work out responses that educate the community to try and change the negative social attitudes towards adoption. WE DO NOT NEED A PROMINENT SPOKESPERSON FOR THE ADOTION COMMUNITY, WITH A CAMPAIGN WITH MAJOR SPONSORS, PROMOTING ADOPTION AWARENESS THAT MERELY PERPETUATES THE NEGATIVE STIGMA. Language is very powerful and is the basis of our cultural construction. Research and experience is telling us to change this language for the sake of our children’s healthy identity development. Such language is responsible for ‘adoptism’ (which is no different to the concept of racism) and needs to be stopped. The idea of an ‘Adoption Awareness Week’ to me is an exciting opportunity to educate people about these complex issues, not promote further ignorance.
I am also quite alarmed with the campaign’s attitude towards older adoptees. Our children will be older adoptees one day, and we need to listen to older adoptees’ voices, their experiences and feelings in order to become better adoptive parents, and implement parenting strategies to help our children deal with possible problems. To hear their stories is by far the best education that adoptive parents can get. If we refuse to hear their stories, and dismiss them as ‘angry adoptees’ (which is the attitude this campaign has taken), we are ignoring an opportunity to prevent adoption identity issues in our younger developing children. It could be said this kind of ‘inaction’ is a form of child abuse.
Please, as adoptive or future adoptive parents, help make this clear to our government that we need our adoption reform campaign (and public awareness of it) to have a more appropriate title, and mission statements that include all members of the adoption triad, and an educational approach to this issue and the many more complex issues of ICA – we need to make sure that ‘adoption awareness’ right from the start is made in consultation with the people educated and experienced in adoption issues, from all perspectives.
Cheers,
Donna
, I have to agree with Jan in that I agree that anyone can have their point of view, but should not purport to represent all adoptive families, children needing adoption, etc.
I, too, would love to be an extra on the PEAK body… and I am glad that Lynelle is on the body to give some weight to the opinions of adoptees.
Deborra Lee.
As an adoptive parent, I have great sympathy for much of what you are trying to do for adoption in Australia.
Heaven knows, we can do with a more streamlined system and less disparity between states.
BUT I am also extremely troubled at much of what I see in the OA campaign. We need to constantly keep in mind, adoption should not be primarily to cater for the desires of a couple to be parents…. even though I’m sure all adoptive parents came into it because of the desire to be parents, so I’m not saying there is anything wrong with that as a starting point. The parent focus is what we have in the US and the lack of education we see in the US system and the seeming lack of social workers and agencies who actually disapprove of a potential parents’ application even if they consider it problematic are huge issues – and those that no-one would want emulated in our Australian system.
Adoption is not about creating families. It is about giving children who need one, a family and the change in focus that brings is important.
We can see the issues currently with Vietnam, Cambodia, Nepal, Guatemala and the troubling allegations of child trafficking in China and they indicate the great need to be extremely vigilant and take time over investigating new programmes and what can happen when due diligence is not undertaken.
We cannot simply go in gung ho and start new programmes or force this to happen. Please instead focus your work on on ethics of adoption and making sure than not one more child is trafficked or sold.
You say ICASN is creating a civil war within the adoption community.
Please look at your own organisation before criticising another. By refusing to listen to adoptees (who, let’s face it, are the ‘experts’ in adoption and it’s ramifications) you are also creating division and a ‘them and us’ within the community.
You are refusing to consider their point of view, what they want from adoption reform and, instead, attack them because they have a different point of view. Someone wanting real reform, real ethical adoptions only if a child genuinely needs it (and yes, I have seen children in orphanages many times) would be listening to the stories of those who have found they were trafficked, sold, etc and be determined to stop even one more child from having this happen to them. The stories of adoptees in what worked for them as children and young adults – what helped them, and what didn’t are a valuable lesson for current parents. Who wouldn’t want to listen to them? . Please don’t dismiss them as being ‘bitter’.
For example, your single mindedness over the name, OA, is a case in point. My child, an early teen, feels commodified by it. They also feel uneasy about the ‘saved’ comments. Yes, I would have to say they are probably better off here rather than home . As an adoptee adopted at an older age, they are also mindful of the issues they have had to face in terms of learning language, the loss of country and culture, entering a foreign school system and struggling, not being a member of the majority, etc. All the while folks are expecting them to be grateful (and tell my children ‘you are lucky’) and with no acknowledgment (even ever so slightly) of their loss and the hard work they have had to put in. Try telling a refugee they are ‘lucky’ – it’s the same thing. So please don’t tell my child they are bitter if they want to share or they need to get their experience out. Give them understanding, allow them to talk, listen to them and ask ‘how can we change things’…. In short, learn from them.
Please don’t confuse passion for ethical reform as being anti-adoption. I am as passionate about adoption as anyone can be.
But, we need people like you who CAN make a difference to :
- lobby for ethical adoption reform and full transparency in sending country’s processes.
- lobby for vastly improved pre-adoption and post adoption education for adoptive parents so that they can better help their children deal with the issues they will have.
- lobby for post adoption support for adoptees.
- look at the issue wholistically. Not every child may need adoption. How about helping and extending the work of SOS children’s villages or supporting foster care programmes within other countries so the children can stay in their country? Use publicity to generate interest in developing those programmes.
Yes, poster number 93. I have been to the ‘third world’ several times though I choose not to travel now on ecological grounds and also I believe that the tourist industry is generally destructive to many communities. I will go to another country only if invited now. I was born into a very bourgeois middle class family and had and continue to have many comforts and privileges. But I have never been satisfied with middle classness. I strive for much more in my life. My husband is a refugee from a ‘third world’ country sucked dry and kept a ‘third world’ country by the biggest and richest nations on this planet. These rich countries even take their precious children. Bought by wealthy white middle class couples. By the way the ‘third world’ exists here in Australia if you just go for a drive out of your suburb and comfort zone.
Poster number 49/88
Dear poster number 88,
Thank you for your comment. I am not ‘anti-adoption’ however just not ‘pro-adoption’. Just because a child has both parents dead or is abandoned does not automatically mean that they should be adopted to strangers in a foreign country. What about other family members? Extended family? Family friends? What about adoption with a local family with in their own country/culture? There will be circumstances when even this is not available and then overseas adoption may be appropriate.
How do we know that the child has no parents? Or has been abandoned? Many parents have left their children in care only to come back at a later date to find their children gone. How do we know this has not happened? Just because someone says it is so doesn’t necessarily means it is so. Transparency and accountability at all stages is essential to protect the interests of the children. Where there is money to be made (or lost) there are unscrupulous people ready to take advantage. Women and children are trafficked every day. They are valuable commodities for some. This I know from personal experience. More than a thousand Serbians were kidnapped by some Albanians in the 1990’s and were executed and their body parts sold. Those receiving these organs probably have no idea and would be horrified if they knew. But as a rule I do support organ donation. It saves lives. But transparency and accountability is absolutely necessary. Adoption in the right circumstances saves lives. But in the wrong circumstance it can destroy lives too.
Hi 102. It is great to see this blog has now some sensible and rational debate. Although we dont agree on everything we can show that some of the rubbish from others is not required.
My (first hand) experience is that:
1. A country will only put a child forward for ICA when all avenues for extended family and other local family adoption have been exhausteed. This is fact with all the Aust. programs I have looked at.
2. Australia will only deal with Hague signatory countries and then only those who Aust. deem to be practicing thoses principles.
3. ICA policy of many countries will also place a child with with a parent of same ethnic orgin first.
When I’ve experienced the overseas methods - first hand - with all the checks and balances - met with the people in the “system” over “there” I know in these cases the childs best interest is always paramount.
Take care - Have a great day!
Thank you Donna and the following poster (currently showing as 84, but something strange is happening with posting numbers I think!) for so eloquently expressing what I had been trying to with my earlir post and failed.
For me, you have cut right to the heart of the issue and that is that we as adoptive parents owe it to our own children to listen to, value and learn from adult adoptees so that we may gain from their experiences and be better parents to our own children.
One day my children will be adult adoptees themselves and I would hope that they would be valued by the next generation of adoptive parents for what they too can teach from their life experiences, not dismissed as “angry” or “bitter” if they have something to say that adoptive parents don’t want to hear!
Regards,
Leah (Adoptive Mum)
Hi there,
To the person that posted about National Adoption Awareness Weeks and Orphan Angels being separate - NAW is a blank sheet awaiting for different groups to start organising / implementing / creating / etc. (The post has been deleted now)
Thanks for reading my post, and the words of encouragement that NAW is an opportunity for such education and awareness to be shared with our community.
However, the person who seems to be co-ordinating the event, uses his ‘orphan angels’ sign off (email address, website etc). This gives the impression that Orphan Angels is the driving force. If it is not, this person should remove this sign off. I would also expect that given the celebrity image of the group, Orphan Angels will be the adoption group that gets most ‘awareness’ out of it.
I could not be a part of such hypocrisy. I have brought myself to taking a look at this website (previously the name of the group knocked me so sick I couldn’t go any further). Orphan Angels promotes NAW as ‘Every Adoptive Group ( all parties to adoption are welcome ) will be able to take this structure and work to dispel myths and educate the outside community about the many complex facets of adoption’.
When ‘Orphan Angels’ is perpetuating the circulation of a myth this would be a pretty hard goal to achieve…..
Changing the name would be a really good first step…
Cheers,
Donna
Apparently the Sunday Telegraph recently announced the Australian Government’s intention to support a National Adoption Awareness week. As an adoptee, when I heard this I felt deep distress, a sinking feeling, and black despair. It’s the last thing I need on Mother’s Day because it’s a day that I always feel like my Mother died. This is the ambiguous nature of adoption loss. Feeling like my Mother has died but knowing that she is alive; it is unresolvable, never ending loss. It gets confusing and I suffer alone because people don’t understand this to be part of adoption.Why is it my karma to feel forever invalidated?
Just when I think that perhaps there is more “awareness” about the impact of adoption in society something appalling and insensitive like Adoption Awareness week comes along! My concern is that instead of raising awareness about the grief, loss and pain inherent in adoption, this “awareness week” will promote adoption and invalidate the pain of those affected; a feeling I know well as an adoptee. I have a good adoptive family but the typical lack of understanding I received in my adoptive family and in society has been almost as traumatic as growing up separated from my birth family and the difficulties of reunion.
Why is it that society and the government refuse to learn from the mistakes of the past? There are many statistics showing the disproportionate prevalence of adoptees in psychiatric services and prisons. Clearly there is something traumatic about adoption, so it is insensitive to promote it. It is unfair on natural mothers who suffered incredibly, unfair on adoptees, and it also is unfair on adoptive parents who do not get adequately prepared for the realities and the difficulties. Adoption should be a last resort, not something natural families are pressured into due to lack of alternatives, as was the case with my adoption, and most other adoptions as well.
I hear of “adoption awareness” and I feel deeply hurt and upset that no-one will acknowledge my pain as an adoptee. Mothers’ day is a very traumatic time for me. I’m 36 years old and I breakdown crying every Mothers day because I can’t resolve my relationship and broken bond to my natural mother. To have adoption week on top of that makes me contemplate whether my life is worth anything. To have my pain blocked out by the promotion of what caused it makes me feel suicidal.
Why is the government ignoring the pain of the past? Why is it not finding alternatives to adoption instead of encouraging it? Adoption is a life long sentence of loss for adoptees and birth parents. Adoption is a baby supply market. It must be awful to be infertile but it’s awful to give a child (who has already been relinquished and feels rejected) the responsibility of being the answer for someone elses infertility. Adoptees need to be accepted for their own history and past abandonment yet this rarely happened due to societies celebratory attitude to adoption. Imagine if you were at a funeral of your whole family and everyone around you kept telling you that this is “loss of family awareness week” and they wouldn’t acknowledge the grief you were feeling and insisted that you be grateful and happy to be there. How would you feel then? That’s what adoption awareness week feels like to me.
There is much research available that demonstrates the pain and loss inherent in adoption. VANISH is a post adoption support agency in Victoria that deals with the real stories of those affected, this would be an informative place for you to get information if interested in what you are promoting, (also PARC in Sydney). The best selling book on adoption is the Primal Wound by Nancy Verrier, please read this before doing or saying anything about adoption.
Please don’t repeat the ignorance of the past i.e. stolen generation, the pressured adoptions of the 50’s-70’s and the denial, secrecy, and ignorance that went with that. Intercountry adoptees have been found to have more problems than local adoptees, that makes the promotion of this kind of adoption even more appalling. Adoptees fought so hard to gain access to their records in Victoria in 1985. It seems that they have to keep fighting for society to hear their loss and pain. There is a lot of money to be made in intercountry adoption.
Taking someone elses baby does not reduce the pain of infertility, it just complicates and adds pain to a mother and a child’s life. Please get with the times and do what is humane rather than what makes the most money. If you are going to have “adoption awareness week” then give out information on the statistics of adoptees who commit suicide, are in psychiatric services, and prison and get people to think about the reality of what happens when people are separated from their families and told not to grieve but rather to be grateful.
Regards
Sue
Adoptee
I do not support Deborah-Lee’s campaign. Personally I have no dislike for her and am sure that her intentions are good. In fact, dare I say that what we all want is the same thing. We want these children to be with family.
The difference between me and Deborah-Lee is that I want to see the children with *their* families and she wants to have them sent overseas to be with strangers who then become a family.
The ones who are truly orphans still have family and I’d like to see energy being put into helping the families be able to raise these children.
What we need to do is look at the reasons why children are being placed in these insitutions. Rather than exploit the situation to benefit infertile couples, what we need to do is go to the source of the problem - poverty. It pretty much boils down to poverty.
We are not talking about children that people don’t want, we are talking about children whose families are unable to cope with raising. Let’s help the families rather than help ourselves to their children!
Signed
KimKim
My understanding is that Deborra-Lee’s son WASN’T an orphan until his first mother committed suicide in despair over the fact that the Jackmans took him out of the country and thus away from her. And even then, he probably has a first father out there, correct?
If you think adoptees are merely property instead of human beings endowed with basic rights, then I suppose there’s nothing wrong with D-L’s desire to transfer a child into every prospective adoptive parents’ home so that they (the parents) can be fulfilled.
It’s too bad that she’s trying to make Australia into a mini-USA. The adoption industry in the States is not to be emulated. It should be scorned. You’ve done so much better up to now, you Aussies…keep it up!!