Meeting with Birthmother - Please Help...

I think one of the points that both Janey and I would like to make is that even IF someone makes a conscious decision to relinquish their child...no matter WHAT the circumstances, it is a life long loss to that mother. I can be happy that my son has had a great life, and the life I wanted him to and didn't think I was abe to give him at the age of 18, but my heart aches every single day that it wasn't me giving him those things.

Mannie, Dpens wording was just fine and in context with the rest of the sentence. Kind regards,Dickons

You can make the choice to not be a parent. I did so. That does not, IN ANY WAY, mean the child is not lost to you. Just becuase it was by your own hands, and your own decision, does not negate that fact. I will admit, this is a hot button issue for me, but I have had that assumption shoved down my throat ("well, you signed the papers, you MADE your DECISION, it's not like anyone FORCED you, you DIDN'T WANT to parent" [so suck it up and quitcherbichin]) so many times and it is a common misperception and misunderstanding that does need to be addressed. Yes, we signed papers. Yes, in my case, it was my decision to do so. That does not take away from the fact that my child was still lost to me as a result of extremely limited and difficult circumstances beyond my control which colored my decision to place. I do believe it was the right choice under those circumstances. But it's one of my huge pet peeves, the notion that because I decided on adoption, it's just a "you made your bed, now lie in it" type of situation and I am not supposed to feel that my child was lost to me. For other first moms who did not make a decision, but rather had that decision made for them, it is even more insulting. Even if these are the circumstance, that STILL does not mean a loss is not involved! I imagine there are some women out there who carried and bore children who really don't see it as a loss, who have no maternal feelings, who don't grieve it as a loss, and who are perfectly 100% OK with placing their children. I would venture to say these women are in the extreme minority. And I'm not judging them, either, if that is their feeling and reality. But it is up to the woman placing to decide what is a loss to her, or if she feels her child has been lost to her even though she made a "decision" to place. Not anyone elses. To state a child is not lost to a woman because she was the one who signed those papers is presumtive and extremely dismissive, and it is this sort of dismissiveness that I believe (as a first mom who feels a very deep loss, despite the fact that I willingly and non-coercively signed) contributes to so many first moms feeling completely misunderstood and disregarded. Is it the phrasing, "lost her child" or "lost to her" that you are on the fence about, Manni? Is it that you feel if a mother makes a choice to have her baby placed, saying that child is "lost" is like her saying the child was taken from her unwillingly or kidnapped or stolen from her? I am not trying to imply that is how I feel at all, and I take full ownership of my decision, and yet I still feel my child was lost to adoption, even if it was at my own choosing and I signed those papers.

. Quantum: I respect what you're saying and I do understand. And as I said before it was the context of what Dpen's wrote. I know it's a life long loss ( my bmom told me the same thing; she was 16 when she had me) but what I was trying to say is, we don't know the whole side of the story for this particular bmom ( or any bmom for that matter). So when someone write something like "she lost her child to adoption" it puts me on the fence because we don't if she really wanted to parent or not. When I hear this saying it sound to me like: "she had no other choice she was powerless ( in some cases it's true), and the "big bad adoption machine" took her child. No harm meant -Manni:wings:

Peachy: I think you just solved my own answer! It's the context of " the child as taken from her unwillingly as in kidnapped or stolen". I understand the "loss" of memories, history and the initimate relationship between mother and child. But when the term "loss" is used as you stated above, it puts me on the fence. I know when I was born ( the BSE), the bmom was most likely a teen and she had no choice, but I think in today's times most bmothers do have more choices and thats why I'm on the fence with the saying. -Manni:wings:

Manni, I can't speak for all women who've relinquished their babies for adoption, but I can speak for myself... I often use the phrase "lost my son to adoption". Please bear with me as I try to explain the reason for the phrase. In the early 1970's, it was practically a societal mandate for the girls and young women of white middle-class America who had the audacity to become pregnant outside of wedlock to relinquish their babies. There were very few choices, not if we "truly loved our babies". I did lose my son to adoption. I believed the crap that my teachers and church taught me. I caved into the demands of my parents and grandparents. I was not strong... Relinquishment (which was called surrender on the legal documents in 1972) was the payment for my crime of having sex outside of marriage as a young teenager. I can see your point of view, though, Manni. I know that "lost to adoption" must sound weird to someone who hasn't signed those papers willingly. I was just thinking about how when my dad was dying, I signed the authorization to remove him from life support. I was the person who actually "pulled the plug" on him...literally. Even though I okayed the hastening of his death with my signature and action, I still "lost" my father. I'm not sure what I'm trying to say...but that is what came to mind. :loveyou:

Manni, with all due respect, I think you are still missing the point though. So what you are saying is, if a birthmom had a choice, she has no right to feel her child was lost to her? Because the child was not stolen or kidnapped or forcibly taken? The point I am trying to make is that by using the word "lost" a birth mother (or anyone else) is NOT necessarily saying the child was forced from them (for example, in my situation, that was not the case), but it is still entirely possible to feel your child was lost to you. Whether it was your decision or not to place or whether you had the choice to parent or not, is not relevant to the sense of feeling your child was lost to adoption. There are complexities in this issue that go beyond simple conclusions, i.e. "well you had choice and you made that choice, so your baby was not lost to you because the option was there to keep him or her." It's far more complex, and there are so many gray areas (i.e. what exactly is "choice" when options are limited, how does "choice" or "decision" play out when one has hopes and dreams or even standards for their child that they cannot meet, what if someone wants to parent but not in the circumstances they are in, etc.) You are making the assumption that to say your baby was lost equates to having no choice and being victimized. And if a birth mom signed papers even though she had other options, her child cannot possibly be lost to her. I am saying that you CAN have choice and that doesn't matter. When you place a child, your child is lost to you, no matter the circumstance. And by saying they are lost to you, that doesn't necessarily mean she is saying there was forcible removal, manipulation, having your baby stolen, being a victim of the "adoption machine" or anything like that. It is still a loss, regardless, for most women.

Peachy & Raven: I understand what you both are saying and please forgive me if I may have come across as dismissive of your opinions. And as I stated before, I understand the loss of history, memories and the parental relationship between mother and child. A mother who places her child will feel a lost, I totally get it ( I've always have).She has every right to grieve what she has lost. It's just sometimes ( when used in a different context and tone) it can come across as "I'm the helpless victim of the adoption machine"( not in your case). Once again, my apologies if I came across as dismissive. Manni:flower:

(((Manni))) I personally didn't feel that your post was being dismissive of us, Manni. I just wanted to explain the best I could why I use the phrase "lost to adoption". I probably should have explained why I use it in my posts a long time ago. I've seen this issue come up on other threads, but I've never spoken up about it until now. I think as times change and society changes, it becomes difficult to understand those of us from the dark ages, lol... :loveyou:

Raven: As always, I respect your wisdom. -Manni:wings:

Manni, In grief theory, losses are distinguished between voluntary and involuntarylosses. Research shows that others often have difficulty accepting voluntary losses... i.e. losses that result from a voluntary decision made by the grieving person. Others are less likely to be sympathetic and they often negate or diminish the loss. Voluntary losses do not diminish a loss in any way, shape or form. If anything they are harder to grieve because of the lack of acceptance by society.

Thanks for that Brenda. I did some reading about grief due to the depression I felt over the loss of my daughter. That's when I realised that I was also grieving the loss of my home town - a voluntary loss - I had wanted/needed to shift but I still missed my home town and everything that was familiar with it - it was yet another loss on top of the voluntary loss of my daughter to adoption. I am currently grieving the loss of a long friendship that I decided to end - voluntary loss again - due to it being unhealthy. What I might grieve over, my nextdoor neighbour may not give a second thought - we are all so different but loss can hit you in so many ways even when you have made the "right" decision...

Hey Manni, I apologize for not getting back here sooner to respond to your response to me. (Good grief! I sound like an insurance disclaimer!) Just wanted to say I appreciate your clarifying your position. I know it's not easy to communicate on a public site where people have to pre-pre-pre think what they're saying even after they've said it. If that makes sense. Raven We are not from the dark ages....we're from the middle ages!! LOL!!! he he he Brenda Thanks for posting that.

Manni, I don't feel you were being personally dismissive, either. I know I have strong opinions on this, moreso in that it is a "hot button" issue for me, but I appreciate the debate, and don't feel you have any reason to apologize. It looks like we BOTH have strong opinions on this matter! I also understand what you are saying, in that if a woman voluntarily relinquishes a child, there is some degree of personal responsibility in that decision or choice that maybe you feel she is overlooking or negating altogether by saying her child is lost to her (as if it was forcibly taken when in fact, it was not the case). I get that piece of it. However, Brenda summarized what I was trying to get at, so much more clearly and concisely than I could (thank you Brenda!), in terms of how "voluntary losses" are looked at. For me, voluntarily choosing to relinquish a child and feeling or saying the child is lost to you are not mutually exclusive things. At the same time, I can understand how saying the phrase "lost to me" implies a passivity, or that my child was taken away or went missing or something that I had nothing to do with. It could be the limitations of language at work here, or perhaps the phrasing is not as accurate or precise as it should/could be.

Thank you all for your posts! Although I originally posted this back in October, I've checked back several times to see if there were any responses. I really appreciate every ones advice, especially Heidi and Manni's kind guidance! The relationship with BP's is unique. Not many people understand or can really relate to the dynamics of such a relationship, so your help is much appreciated! We spoke with our daughters BM in November. We decided to keep visits to once per year (BM originally specified once per year and we agreed). It was a very difficult decision because we care deeply about her and never ever want to cause her pain in any way, but it was the right decision for our child and for us. In thinking about this very carefully and considering every ones feelings, we are at peace with our stand on the original mutually agreed upon annual visit for the time being. Even though the word "boundaries" seems very offensive to some in this blog, if you think about it, most relationships have boundaries, and this is no different. I came here with sincere concerns to make the situation the best it can be for all involved. So for all of you that got that, thank you from the bottom of my heart for your posts! I do have some additional questions and concerns, but will have to write back later as it is bubble time :)