There is this fine line in adoptionland that I really try hard not to trip over. It’s something that, I think, frequently confuses dear Rye. He sees me doing all this stuff, this research, this writing, this time..and he wonders..Hey! Aren’t you EVER going to make any money off of this? Now, really..we know the answer, is NO. Which is fine. I mean, it would be great if I did..just because making a living off of doing what you have a passion for is cool..but chances are..no.
But, that’s not really my point. Just his confusion which is kind of cute. lol.
Sometimes, I feel very self promotional in a not so great way. Like I post all this “I am doing this..I am here..I wrote this..blah blah” And dispite some snarky commentary who would like to infer otherwise, it’s not that I think I *am* the be all and end all..ugg..I don’t have the time to be a half wit, much less and end all! And while I know what I know, I know I don’t know it all..and heck, I only know what I do know from those who came before me and did the same with what they knew. The point is..I don’t do this all, or even post what I do so I can get the half dozen or so “You Rock” comments..nice as they are.
And I guess, my intention has backfired in some way because when I post stuff..I mean to do it in an INSPIRATIONAL way. Because, in my head..I am NOBODY SPECIAL.
Like really…just a chick from Long Island who lives in a cute city..yada yada..hubbie and kids etc. I don’t have a great education from Harvard or something, I haven’t written a book, yet!..and mostly, I am still shocked when something great happens and I am included. The whole point, is that if I can do this stuff, than really, ANYONE CAN!
But, this is where I feel bad..coz just a few weeks ago, in an Origins-USA board meeting, someone said something along the lines of “Well some people don’t feel that they can write as well as ….and Claud” And then, I felt bad. Coz, again, my lame attempt at this writing business, still feels like I am mascrading really. And if it intimidates folks? Not good!! People should not be fearful of feeling dumb..I dofeel dumb half the time and it hasn’t killed me yet! Or not wanting to Blog if they feel they can’t say it like I can- Don’t try! Say it like YOU can! I feel boring enough..we don’t need more of my lame babble!
Again..I am shooting for INSPIRATIONAL!
Please.. don’t look up to me and think dumb shit like:
“I can’t write like that”
“No one will listen to me”
“I feel dumb coz I really don’t know what I am talking about”
etc.
Or, realistically, go ahead and think that dumb shit.. because I DO TOO!… and then, DO SOMETHING ANYWAY!! Because that’s what I do. Really, I am only as smart as my Google search engine allows me to be. And you probably have Google too so we are equal.
Like, guess what? I am very impressed and was always way intimidated with Bastardette. And felt really, really LAME even attempting to Blog like Marley’s actual intelligence and knowledge and wit, but, yeah, I did it anyway…and you know what? I still find it CRAZY that she gave ME props! But, meeting Marley.. smart, funny, and remembers names like nobodies business…she’s pretty “normal”..like “regular” folk..though I think she might hit me for saying that..hence the quotes! LOL
The point being..I think most of us.. have fears and insecurities and self doubts, but we should not let that fear prevent us from doing things that matter.
Speaking out matters.
Every little bit of helps..not just for you, not just for me, but for countless others that will come after you. For your children and your children’s children. You matter.
I don’t know what your internal doubting Thomas tells you what you can and cannot do. I don’t know what your fears are. But, I can attempt again to be inspirational.
Somethings that you can do…will even keep your internal doubting Tom happy.
Join Origins-USA. Why? Because it’s hip happening. No really, OUSA is actually doing stuff. It’s an ACTIVIST group. We are ACTIVE! Look at our year end letter. Yeah, it’s impressive, but I promise that if you join you will not be made to do the same unless you want too. There is other stuff that you can do too.
JUST JOINING ALONE….helps in big ways. If you never do anything else, lending your name to the growing numbers of people speaking out is huge. There is a huge difference from saying “XYZ groups represents 45 mothers” vs. “ABC represents the voices of 3000 people separated by adoption”.
YOU DON’T NEED BIG MONEY…Standard membership cost 20 bucks, but if you can’t afford that..no biggie..there is a whole sliding scale thing too. And of course, on the opposite end, you can just give big money if that’s what you have and that’s what you do. You don’t have to join to give money.
But, I have to say.. that really..I do not think that there is any excuse to NOT be officially counted in some way. If you can’t speak out, at least be part of the body count…with some membership be it OUSA, or CUB, or AAC, or BN ..find somethong that best suits you..but get counted…because you matter..you really do…we all do.
And that even gets us back to the “how” we communicate. Like as I say I am just as easily intimidated. I get floored with things that other people write too. I read what I think is brilliant by others and I feel just as unimportant, just as lame, for not saying it in the same way, not thinking it before, not saying it in that way, etc. And, again, I can’t let that matter really…it matters, it affects us all, but one voice is not all of us..and you never know who you might connect with, you never know who might resonate with YOUR particular way of saying something, with your feelings. You just don’t always know who you might touch.
Anyway, back to OUSA..I know some people have been burnt in ways before by this and other organizations. And it’s hard sometimes to assilimilate to an organization where you might not think that you fit in, or that you subscribe to all thier doctrine, but it’s not like that, it’s really not.
For one, I have to say that THIS Origins-USA is not the one that you had previous dealings with if you did. It’s a kinder, not exclusive OUSA…as in we will exclude and mock you and rip you open for not being a clone of sorts. And without going into detailed descriptions of adoption dirt, just take my word, if you know what I am speaking of…it’s different now, and if you don;t now, then don’t worry abput it. Just know that it’s worth it to be part of something…you can still be your own person,and that can be an adopted person, or a mom or a dad or a sibling, or even an adoptive parent who also believes in family preservation or even jusy someone who cares!.. but it feels really good to believe that you stand for something.
And then there are really EASY ways of making that stand. You can help by just Shopping! Isn’t that just too easy? Just by doing your normal everyday stuff, you can help! Through iGive, every time you shop on the Internet at any one of over 660 different retail establishments, just click on the iGive button before you finish your shopping, and choose Origins-USA as your tax deductible charity of choice, and a percentage of your purchase price will automatically be set aside for Origins-USA.
See..pretty button and everything!
In anycase, being that these are the last days of 2007, and with New Years resolutions and all, I want to give, again, some inspiration…yes, we all want to do more, no, even I feel that I am not doing enough, so we start anew. We say we are going to do more, be more, be better, etc. So try. Start simple..baby steps really…and I promise, it gets easier. Everyday, you do a little more, and it jusy gets easier. Abd again, even if you just want to, need to, be quiet, take it all in, read and lurk..just join. Be counted.
So be loud, be a voice, get counted, join something!
YOU MATTER! We need you.. we need all of us!
Totally glad OUSA has changed and is doing stuff now-a-days, however, I’ll say the same thing to you I’ve said to my mother.
Unless OUSA plans on giving adoptees equality, not just the right to vote but the right to serve on the board, to make those changes within the organization in the exact same way as the mothers, you can just count this adoptee out. OUSA in this way is still exclusive for moms.
I do think the exclusivity is a really good reason not to join OUSA in particular. If I didn’t stick to this I wouldn’t be being my own person, so I am sticking to it.
If things change at some point, then I might revise my support of OUSA and join, but I don’t go where I’m not treated exactly equal.
Best in 08.
Jean
Claud, you were one of my inspirations to start blogging, and so you have inspired me even before you wrote this incredibly inspiring post! You rock!
Claud, as always, I can echo your position.
I have also had those insecurities and have discussed them with many.
My personal belief is that EACH one of us has something to offer and we can do it in our own way – either with OUSA, BN, CUB or whatever.
So you cannot write? Maybe you draw. Maybe you are an artist, a singer, a spoken word arist, maybe you are good at compiling research, mailing letters, making calls, etc.
Everyone has a voice and has the ability to make change.
Whether you do it on your own, with an organization, with a group that supports all members of the triad or one that doesnt, just do something. It is the collective that will make things change.
Everyone pecking away at their own little piece of the pillar of adoption reform.
I have support the mission and goals of OUSA and I intend to do so in O8.
My best to you and Bern and all the other Mothers on the Board. I support the message and the intent.
Together we will prevail. I am sure.
OUSA has indeed done wonderful things in the past few years and I expect the trend to continue.
You are right, Claud. We all need to use our voice (in whatever form we can) to speak out and be heard.
I feel pretty let down by Origins, though, and by most of the adoption groups. Even Origins, after the change. I felt VERY used when person contacted me, just to get money from me by membership, acting all like they were my friend, and wanting to know what is up with me, supporting me in a personal way, and then I paid membership dues, and the person disappears.
I mean, I understand that not everyone can support every issue, but being used and fronted makes my blood boil.
I hope that Origins, CUB, AAC, Bastardette, and all of them make great strides, but I realize that as always, I am too different.
You were also a big inspiration to help me get brave enough to blog, Claud. Thanks so much for all you are doing. It really does make a huge difference and I hope all the groups will grow and thrive and be heard more in 2008.
Claud you keep pushing and inspiring this amom and I am so grateful for it…I am a bit concerned about how adoptees are treated at OUSA and will need to get more information…since after all I do have two of those adoptees in my life…but you keep on writing and inspiring…because even if I were the only one inspired, and I am not, at least one more is good…
Happy New Year Claud…and thanks
Dearest Claud,
you’ll be pleased to know that I don’t look up to you and feel inferior….ha ha ha ha!
HAPPY NEW YEAR!
Keep up the great work!
love
Kim
I’m post-Christmas fragile and consequently resistent to being rah-rah-rahed into anything. Least of all OUSA.
You don’t need me, Claud, you really don’t.
Quite apart from the fact that I’m an adopter as well as a bio-mother (which probably counts me out anyway) I’m just not a good team player. Too argumentative.
Besides, I totally agree with Jean about the exclusivity.
As for being counted, I was made to join the Brownies when I was eight. I had to sit under a giant plaster-of-Paris mushroom with a bunch of other little girls and tie knots in string. I refused to go back after the first meeting.
Will that do?
OUSA is going to have to show me proof positive they have changed before I’ll take the group seriously. For awhile, they were the most fringe group out there. Heck, the only adoptees they wanted to hear from were those who babbled their propaganda. If I remember there was some nutjob from a foreign country in charge of the whole thing. I hope it has changed. It was a mess.
You are inspirational and you also bring hope to other first mothers.Because you are showing people that you dont have to be a phd or author to make a difference.Because you reunited with your son and didnt have to share it with us but you did anyways.You’re always sharing something wonderful and useful Everyone has something to offer.All the best for 2008!
First – Happy New Year!!!
Second – this is right on the money:
“Speaking out matters.
Every little bit of helps..not just for you, not just for me, but for countless others that will come after you.”
This – I joined Origins-USA and I encourage every other adoptive parent to do the same!!
Hugs!!
I’ve lurked on your blog for awhile, with a little comment here and there. I’ve appreciated the insight you and other moms have given me. It’s helped me to understand and HEAL as an adoptee.
Thank you for that. Please keep doing what you’re doing!
Re: OUSA, I just don’t know what to think. I’ll check ’em out again. Warily.
I am feeling battered, not by Christmas or New Year’s…but by adoptees and some moms too. VERY BATTERED, beaten up, punched around, chewed up and spit out!!
Bottom line, not every group is for everyone. Can’t be. If you try to be that you become a watered down NOTHING, like the AAC!
Origins does not pretend to be a triad or adoptee group. And we don’t want to be. We are what we are – a kick ass Mother’s activist group that is DOING THINGS, not just whining… proud of it and no intention of changing.
Adoptees will vote but not be on the board as long as I have anything to say about it…just as it is the reverse is true in BN and that’s OK with me. I am a dues paying member of BN and fully accept and always have accepted that it is is THEIR group and their rules I play be there. Why would I WANT to be on THEIR board and work for them?
In case yu don;t know it – being on the board – at least in OUSA – is not having a title and something to put on a resume. It’s HARD WORK! We meet for a MINIMUM of two hours twice a month! In between that I spend a MIN of 8 – 20 hours a week on OUSA work. NO BS! Why would I wan to do that for an adoptee groups working on open records for adoptees only…and why would an adoptee want to do that for us? Open records or equal access is not even part of our mission.
I think that’s how it should be. They have their primary goal, we have ours…and we HOPEFULLY support one another on issues that overlap!
HOPEFULLY – I just got my ass kicked for saying that Mothers want to be called mothers — and from another (adoptee lovin’) MUTHA — so, I’ll go lick my wounds and shut up…
I sent the first 30 years of my adoption “carer” being a cheerleader and supporter of adoptee rights. I’m sixty-freakin’-three (in a couple of weeks) and not in great health. I will spend my last dying breath fighting for the rights of MOTHERS and mothers ONLY and to keep fmailies form being torn apart.
I just read yesterday about a PROSPECTIVE ap being called a “Mom to Be” (when they call REAL expectant moms b-moms! – like we’re handmaidens!). I wanted to gag!! They just KEEP on trying to make us invisible and they wonder why we want to reclaim our MOTHERHOOD?! GIVE ME a freakin’ break!
Mothers need our own group that is going to stand up proud for us, by us and about us!
I don’t know what “director” is…the previous post was from Mirah Riben.
claud, our beloved hagar emailed me yesterday….shes BACK!!!
as an adoptee, i don’t think origins should include adoptees on the board, theres nothing wrong with mothers bringing themselves to freedom from the industry, they need to lead themselves, just like the adoptees need to lead themselves imo.
Adoptees have their places/organizations, mothers deserve their places/organizations too, or else the agendas can become conflicted and lose a main focus.
I don’t believe that Origins needs adoptees on the board either, and as a member of OUSA I would object if the matter were brought to a vote. Sure it would be nice, but Origins is not an umbrella group trying to please everyone. It is an organization formed around first parent issues.
When we formed Bastard Nation we put in our bylaws that only adopted persons could sit on the ExeCom. We did this because BN is an adoptee rights organization created by adoptees for adoptees. We didn’t want to take the chance at some far off time, of being hijacked by first parents, adopters, or any other non-adoptee and our mission being diluted.
Some of our Founding Foundlings are first parents and adopters. They understood and agreed with our stand. Some of them have held very high positions in the organization and would make fine ExeComm members. We would not be where we are today without them.
I’ve always argued that first parent legal and moral arguments must be formulated and driven to conclusion by them. The issues are different from the right to access one’s own personal information from the government.
That said, all members of BN have equal voting rights. As far as I know Origins now does, too. And that is essential.
Just to make myself clear, it’s not the fact that adoptees can’t serve on the board that bothers me. What troubles me is that those who wish to support OUSA but don’t buy into the group’s motto (credo, really) are obliged to exempt themselves if they wish to retain any sort of personal integrity.
That in itself is exclusive.
Well i had a post/ comment reply days ago.. but it got lost!
I am glad that the mothers only board is understood and I think the reasoning coming from Adoptees such as Gershom and Marley stands alone as they said it best!
I don’t really think that I need to be pushing most of who have commented here to join or do anything. Preaching to the choir here. You guys obviously have found a way that works for you.. you are speaking.. you do committ time to this… either with a group that you resonate with, or you made one, like Jean did!, or you are an independant operator like Kippa! This isn’t a “if you’re not in OUSA than you suck thing”
Do I feel some of the preconcieved notions regarding OUSA are off base? Yeah, I do.
Or even if “preconcieved” is the wromng wording.. perhaps past experiences have indeed influenced very real opnions…which i can totally see.
The point of my bringing this new years pitch here was in part to say: This is not the same old OUSA with the same mentality. New and improved! And no, it definatly is not a “drink the special water and believe the doctrine” organization anymore.
Now, I think for some people.. being informed of that change is enough, for others it won’t be.. and that’s cool! I’m not gonna try to change anyones mind. I don’t think I need to..for really, the proof will come in time as OUSA does grow and help facilitate changes.
And now i am going to lunch!
Heather, please call me, I lost your phone number and can’t get into your blog to leave a message for you. There is alot I need to talk to you about. Claud if you can please let her know I have no way to contact her I would appreciate it!
Claud, you are gracious as always, in recognizing that OUSA is not for everyone, and that not being in full agreement or joining does not mean “you suck”:-)As a vocal critic of that group I extend the same courtesy back to you and many others of goodwill….joing OUSA does not mean “you suck” to many of us outside the group either!Non=hostile communcation from both sides makes that a lot easier.
One thing that may make it easier for more people to see that it really IS a new regime and not the same old “swallow the KoolAide” and “languare police” agenda is to revise the explanation of your motto “Motherhood is Forever”.
The mobius strip visual and its explanation is fine and clear, but the “creed” as Kippa called it aroung the motto still stinks of the bad old days. It has way too many “buts” and conditions and contradictions to be clear.
Why not just say “We believe that giving birth makes one a mother forever, and no change of circumstance, surrender, or adoption can erase or change that. Our motherhood is forever.” Period.
That’s all you need to make a statement just about every open-hearted mother who has given up a child can agree with, without getting into a whole lot more that some may not be comfortable or in agreement with.
Just a thought. Sometimes things look different from the outside than from withing where everyone speaks the same language and accepts all the same beliefs.
OH dear, what is the old evil credo? Why are you not telling me? Everyone seems to know it but I do not.
As an adoptee I echo the other adoptees, why on earth would I need to be on a board of a first parent organization? that might almost be as crazy as having an adoptive father waffle with Atwood in discussing obcs for adoptees, as our representative.
I think causes are best served by the people they directly effect.
We believe that giving birth makes one a mother forever, and no change of circumstance, surrender, or adoption can erase or change that. Our motherhood is forever.”
Thats an awfully long tag line and to me it say the same thing as the existing tag line??
Sorry, meant to add as a former, then gone, then back member of OUSA, I feel that many of the issues people have are PERSONAL issues with individual people and not with the vision/mission of the organization. We really need to put our personality clashes aside if we wish to make any progress.
You dont have to like someone to work towards the same goal.
ty ((Claud)) for helping to clear the air.
hugs to ((Mary)) and that conflict is resolved. 🙂
I just want to say, for myself, that my issues are not all personal. I do have some personal issues, as all people do.
My main issue, is that some mothers are more equal than others, so to speak, and Origins never changed their stance re the AQ case, because of the donor egg issue. While I realize that AQ was not the mother of the egg perse, she did carry the twins. AQ is a dear friend to me, and she was attempting to take down the corrupt FL agency / lawyer (Still is). That to me is a high priority.
Then Origins comes out in favor for a relative adoption. (Uncle adopting, as was mother’s choice, according to Origins).
Let me just say that I am glad that Origins exists, and perhaps their recent changes will be a bit tricky as they adjust to their new 501 c 3, etcetra.
I just tend to really be in the highly controversial issues (even controversial to Origins), and while I’m grateful they exist, and I support their agenda, I’m so far over that it doesn’t reach me.
Just to clarify for Suz, the tag line “motherhood is forever” is fine and I agree does not need to be longer. It is the essay expounding on this on the web page that needs work, unless it does indeed say what OUSA believe; that the only way to become a mother is by giving birth, and that adoptive mothers are not really mothers.
Can’t motherhood by birth be forever, and adoptive motherhood also be real and forever in another way? Does one have to cancel out the other? Can’t an adopted person have two mothers? I’m just asking for clarification, as I am not an OUSA member nor likely to become one.
THis is a philosophical difference, not a persnal disagreement.
It’s the sentence “Every person has one, and only one, forever mother.” that bothers me. Surely, that’s for the adopted person to decide.
It’s speaking for them. Telling them what’s what.
If they *don’t* feel that way (for instance, they might feel that they have two ‘mothers’, one biological, one adoptive – and both ‘forever’), they’ve been put in an untenable position, one in which they are unable to support Origins.
Whereas if it weren’t for that single proviso, they’d feel free to be unequivocal in their support.
It gives the impression that Origins rejects anyone who doesn’t fully subscribe to the belief that blood rules in all respects.
I understand what is being said about the “motherhood is firever” motto, but I have to say I don’t see it that same way…
It’s just not all that allusive for me I guess. Historically, in the act of relinquishment and adoption the mother of birth becomes the non mother. That’s legal and accepted, for the most part, sociatially. Now we know that, in the majority of our hearts, it doesn’t work that way.
Our bodies recognize that we have become mothers. Our hormones react as we have. Our hearts are forever altered..and most of the time it seems our brains think the same too. The act of relinquishment does not change that for many mothers.. and thats what it means to me.
Forever altered..forever a mother.
And while some members might refuse to acknowledge the adoptive parents of thier child as legitimate, I can’t personally subscribe to that for the very reasons mentioned here. It’s not my child’s reality..yes, he has two mothers.
And I do not feel, being on the Board of OUSA, that this compromises my personal integity, nor my individulality, nor anything else in that rhelm.
I’m definalty not rejected!
Claud wrote:
And while some members might refuse to acknowledge the adoptive parents of thier child as legitimate, I can’t personally subscribe to that for the very reasons mentioned here. It’s not my child’s reality..yes, he has two mothers.
And I do not feel, being on the Board of OUSA, that this compromises my personal integity, nor my individulality, nor anything else in that rhelm.
I’m definalty not rejected!”
Thanks Claud, and I am glad to hear that. It speaks well for what really goes on within the group.
The problem is from the statement on the OUSA webpage that explains the motto, “Motherhood is Forever”, it is NOT clear that a member or board member of OUSA could in good conscience hold the
view you have just stated, that an adoptee has two mothers, not one mother and one “cargiver”, and
remain true to the stated beliefs of the group.
The explanation of the motto
clearly states, several times,
“A mother is simply defined as one who has conceived and borne a child. Every person has one, and only one, forever mother.”
What are adoptive mothers?
“… they maintain the day-to-day connection of caregiver, protector and decision maker.”
NOT mother, because there can be only one mother. If OUSA as an organization does not promote and believe this, why is it on the webpage as a core creedo, not as one opinion among several that members might hold?
Those of us outside of the organization have only what is on the webpage to let us know what members believe, and if some of these stated beliefs are not held by all or not enforced, there is really no way to know that unless one is a member.And some will not join a group that says an adopted person has only one mother, whether it is the one by birth or the one by adoption.
There are many opinions and belief systems in Origins. I believe that people can have more than one parent / mother / father, and so on. However, I don’t expect Origins to necessarily cater to adoptive parents.
Every focus group must keep its integrity, and focus on the person whom it serves. Origins, in order to survive, must continue to build based on what it believes, and keep moving forward.
It has come a long way in terms of opening its doors. But I warn that it not open its doors too quickly, because then people will see them as flip flopping.
If people choose to not support this organization because of its creed, then that is fine, I think. Not everyone is going to agree. But organizations shouldn’t make its creed based on society’s views, but on the views of its own members. Just in the same way that people who may not like everything that CUB believes, or Bastard Nations believes, and so on.
No, Heather, a group for mothers who have surrendered a child should not cater to adoptive parents, nor should an adoptive parent group cater to surrendering mothers, but ideally both should show some respect for the other’s worth in the adoptee’s life, and not try to pretend the other is irrelvant.
Ultimately any group can espouse any belief it wants in its group rules and creed, and outsiders do not have to like it or agree, but there should be internal coherence and clarity of what the group actually does believe in statements put out to the public.
What I am seeing is what is on the page and what group leaders are saying is contracdictory. If OUSA is comfortable with members having a variety of views on who is a mother and how many mothers and fathers an adoptee can have,(which I hope they are), why does it say publicly on their web page that they believe there is only one mother, and she is the one who gives birth?
If they no longer have language prohibitions around the word “birthmother”, why is there still a whole section for journalists on the OUSA web page on “honest” adoption language that says that the word should NOT be used, and gives a whole other collection of what is and is not politically correct word usage according to OUSA?
Has this group really changed, or is it just window dressing covering up the same old thing?
See…again..I don’t see a mutual exclusivenes needing to be applied here.
And as far as honest adoption launguage.. and debate on THE term, I see it as education and informational. The history of the word, it’s origins, are what they are. The word WAS coined to seperate mothers of birth from thier children…I trully do believe that the adoption industry, as a money making, pro adoptive parent stance, HAS put pressure on us all to use the word.
Granted now it is accepted. Granted many do use it. But that doesn’t make it’s origins more credible, nor does it make the purpose of it more legitimate or pure of heart. And whether people choose to self identify with it, whether we choose to use it in certain cases, with certain audiences, whether we are personally offended by it or not, we should know where it came from and why..and what it means to others…to understand and be able to honor what people feel.
I can defend your personal decision to use it, but then also, my decision to NOT use it, when I feel deemed inappropiate should also be defended.
And Origins, as an educational organization does have a role in explaining the truth and making guidlines for language to suppirt mothers.
As far, again, on the whole one mother stance…. in promoting natural family presevation as primary, which then would elliminate the need for adoption in the first place.. yes, there is one mother.. who gives birth. This is a PROactivtive stance..rather than REactive. Mothers should not be CONSIDERED interchangable. We should not be considered subsitutional. And this way of thought IS being promoted so that one does manage to find thier pending motherhood as valid..as worthy..crisis or not.
Claud wrote:
As far, again, on the whole one mother stance…. in promoting natural family presevation as primary, which then would elliminate the need for adoption in the first place.. yes, there is one mother.. who gives birth. This is a PROactivtive stance..rather than REactive.”
But isn’t OUSA made up of mothers who have already surrendered; their children have already been adopted; hence they have an adoptive mother as well as a natural mother, which equals two mothers? That is a separate issue from family preservation that has nothing to do with being pro-active or reactive. It has to do with acknowledging the reality of the adopted person’s life.
I understand that before an adoption occurs, there is only one mother,and if no adoption occurs, it stays that way. I understand that OUSA promotes family preservation, but is that the only agenda of the group? That does not seem to be the case, and the “only one mother” credo does not really work both before and after an adoption takes place, which it has in all of our cases.
You cannot retroactively
“preserve” families that have already been broken by adoption. Those who have already been adopted, and that would include all of our surrendered kids, have two mothers, whether we or the other mother likes it or not. Isn’t it better to deal with that reality than pretending words can change it?
Pretending?
Look, I don’t really have a great need to debate this to death and I really don’t expect to change your views on this.
I just don’t agree…I don’t see the huge conflict, I don’t feel it, and considering that we know from talking our personal views and feelings are not that far off from each other…I’m not guessing here. Know what I am saying? I’m not on the outside of OUSA..looking in..reading into stuff and thinking about if it works for me or not philosophicially, I’m saying that it works..no conflicts there.
I suppose I could make conflicts happen if I look for them and push it, but that’s not my thing.
I don’t think it has anything to do with pretending.
Yes, mostly moms here, but the goal of those mothers is to prevent this from happening to other moms..and yes, that is the primary goal: Origins-USA is dedicated to promoting natural family preservation and advocating for family members separated by adoption.
Preservation first, support second.
Again, its about activism. It’s about DOING something. That’s why people join OUSA. We don’t need tear wiping and hand holding, we need to kick some ass.
And while no, you can’t preserve something retroactively, you can assist in empowering one to reclaim thier part in it. So many mothers were told they were not mothers, denied thier children, not worthy….
As I say to critics who call me “selfish” for finding Max when I did, how I did…how I was “only thinking of myself”…nope, for the first time ever, I didn’t have him first or his parents forst, or the agency or my family etc.. for the first time , I allowed us all to be equal..I brought myself up to their level and what I felt, what I wanted became just AS important.
So you can’t re-preserve, but perhaps..elevate?
In anycase, still no conflict for me.
Just a suggestion.
Why not just “Motherhood is forever” and drop all the tortured reasoning ?
(Unless of course the point is more about putting adoptive parents in their place than it is about recovering a lost sense of entitlement)
I personally think that would be much bolder and more ’empowering’ than any convoluted justification could ever be.