The above post was sent to me privately in recent days. I have deleted the name of the author of the post from facebook for her privacy reasons. However, it does beg the question as to what adoptive parents should be looked at when considering the multiple sins of the past in relation to the act of adoption. No matter how the apologies are formed, the elephant in the china store will be the role of adoptive parents and the relationships they had with their adopted children most of whom are now adults.
Recently my fifteen year old loyal four legged companion passed away peacefully in our arms at the vet's surgery. it left a gaping hole in both Sheryl's and my hearts. it was so bad for my dear wife, two days later i adopted another puppy, a ten week old full of life addition to our mature household. When thinking about this in relation to most adoptive parents, one can better understand the hole they have in their hearts which makes them pull all stops out to have and raise a child. Contrary to the comments by the anonymous person, some are not infertile, some may be unable to have children due to health reasons, some may have been returned servicepersons who in doing their duty to their country became sterile, some may have worked in hazardous areas and the sterility is a result. you cannot make such blind claims as made by this person. Some may have raised a family then felt it was their duty to society and their god to help a poor disadvantaged baby. No matter what in the vast majority of cases the motives of the adoptive parents were honourable. I say majority because there are bad elements in any level of society.
How involved where adoptive parents in the consent taking process. There is no evidence that adoptive parents were involved in the methods under which consent was taken therefore they are not liable nor should they be condemned. Again there probably will be exceptions but in the main they picked up a child, were told to go home and raise it with no manual or instruction book. Did they create a demand for babies. yes they did. The demand has always been there except prior to the 1920's on the Eastern seaboard there were no controls governing adoption so no knows how many children were moved between households. In Bundaberg in 1896 one could read an advertisement for three babies for adoption just below a advertisement for dingo's for sale. In the 1936 royal Melbourne show there were babies for adoption in the pavilion. So the placement of children with other than their natural family has been going on ever since Adam and Eve got together. And it will never stop. Society needs to ensure controls are in place to prevent exploitation by those in control of the market to ensure there is a well regulated transfer of responsibility of babies at risk and also how to satisfy the human needs of those who do not have children.
but back on this subject, the need for some who cannot live without hate to demonise adoptive parents in general shows that there is a major disorder that needs professional care. if a child at school had made such statements, their parents would be called in and that person sent for professional assessment and counselling. but because she has gone through the horrific events that led to the taking of her child by exploitative means some excuse her activities as being understandable. it would be like understanding the activities of Julian Knight the Hoddle St Killer because he was a late Discovery Adoptee. There is no excuse for such comments and statements about people that she does not even know, nor the circumstances. For a person like this an apology will be a wasted effort as she will never allow her anger to subside unless someone else is hurt
As an adoptee , i know the vast majority of adoptive parents known to me are honourable people who respect the fact that i have a intense dislike of the adoption process. but i freely acknowledge that adoptive parents i have been in constant communication with are also very responsible and caring people who understand my point of view.
And i also know that many adoptee's i know love and respect their adoptive parents because they have given the adoptee all the love they could. Is that the sign of kidnappers, baby stealer's etc. No that is the sign of people who created a family in the only way they could do. I have been castigated because i suggested that the tone of the wording of the apology takes into accounts the feeling of adoptees to their adoptive parents. The last most of us need is an implication that our parents were child thieves , kidnappers (even in the technical sense) and the use of such words should be avoided in the actual apology motion. And yes i know there are a few adoptive parents just like natural parents who should never have been put within 100 yards of a child. I am talking generally.
The upcoming apology is not about the adoptive parents, it is about we who are the survivors of the adoption process. But they will be present in the minds and hearts of the adoptees who are yearning for validation and acknowledgement of what did occur in the past which so badly affected us in the long term. but let us remember that just as we adoptees do not generally pass judgement upon our natural mothers as to why we were not allowed to stay with them; nor should anyone pass judgement as to why the adoptive parents desired to have children under circumstances different to that which nature has provided.