Much has been said lately about adoptees being free born or born free. However, given the fact that adoptees were minors it means very little. The act of adoption is separate from the act of removing a child from their parents and the circumstances under the consent was signed. Even when coercion can be proved the courts have been loathe to return a child citing the best interests interests of the child as reasoning. As to the correctness of the courts decisions i cannot make a judgement. But what is interesting is that there is no right to a child by anyone there is only the responsibility for a child and the act of adoption transfers that responsibility to the adopters. Therefore claims of ownership of a child are legally false.
I have read where many mothers believe their children were stolen. And I have to agree that by today's standards and by many standards of yesteryear this occurred. And I grieve for them. But to say that adopters were greedy and evil for preventing contact or encouraging their adopted offspring not to have contact is also failing to see things from another perspective. Ask your self " what would you do in the same circumstances? " The vast majority of adopters took their responsibilities for the children they adopted seriously and were fine parents and the children were an integral part of the family unit. Sure there was a some cases of abuse and probably at a higher rate than natural families. But the majority of adopters were people who loved the children and were not aware of the "primal Wound "affect and when confronted with what they considered an outside threat reacted defensively. My as/mother upon me telling her that i knew i was adopted went straight into defensive mode saying "they told me your mother had died" I knew instinctively that she was not telling the truth but said nothing due to her advanced age. I am sure with the knowledge of today the majority would have reacted differently. And i ask everyone how would you have reacted to an outside threat to the family unit.
In some other cases i have heard that adoptees were left out of their adopters estates upon their passing. As adoptees are legally the offspring of their adopters this means that many did not seek legal advice or they got bad advice as the courts can amend wills to include all legal children.
Whenever a person denigrates an adopter or uses other forms of abuse directed at adopters, they are in reality abusing and denigrating the adoptee because in reality they are calling into question the adoptees life. Some may feel this is appropriate but in reality all it does is to create conflict because the life path of an adoptee was forever changed by the act of adoption. Sure many have been abused by their adopters but that is also part of their lives as well. Only the adoptee can aim criticicm at his/her adopters as only they know the circumstances of how their life developed. For any one criticising adopters and saying "But we don't means yours "is the same as telling a koori friend ": we don't mean you mate but .............. ". And that bloody hurts