Archive for Think on it

Defining Happiness

September 9, 2009 · Filed under Friends, Think on it, dating, therapy

While having drinks with IT guy last week the discussion turned to how much we’ve learned about ourselves recently and about being happy.  I tried to explain how I feel about how he and I and a bunch of others in our circle seem to define happiness.  

I tried to explain that we’re very immature in our view of happiness. That its a very black and white view for a world made up of shades of grey.  He didn’t get what I was trying to say and I couldn’t really find the words to explain it.

Then this week I was schooled by TG the fabulous.  She wrote about choosing happiness and in doing so said in part:

  • I smile more than I cry.
  • I laugh daily.
  • I don’t feel guilty for the good things that I’ve created in my life.

    • And thats what I was trying to say to IT guy.  

    That happiness isn’t the absence of real life tough stuff, it’s enjoying the good stuff anyway.  I must admit I’m not there at the moment.  I’ve been there and then I’ve regressed, but I know I’ll be there agaim. And now that is what I’m reaching for, I’ve given up on seeking that idealized happiness.

    I feel I should have grasped this concept sooner, and been able to explain it to IT guy. How many times have I said adoption isn’t all rainbows and butterflies?  A lot.  So why couldn’t I explain that life isn’t all sunshine either.  The rain will come (hell I live in the Pacific NorthWest so a LOT of rain will come) but happiness isn’t the lack of rain, its dancing in the rain, coping with the thunder, and enjoying the sunbreaks.

    Comments (3) »

    Why Can’t We Grieve?

    May 28, 2009 · Filed under Adoption, Think on it, therapy

    Started to write this in the comments over at Writing My Wrongs but as I typed I also thought, and it got long.  Too long to leave in the comments section. 

    In life when there is loss their should be grief.  Without grieving or mourning something how do people heal?  Well in the world of adoption loss you aren’t allowed to grieve.  I think societies refusal to validate our grief can be explained in two parts. 

    First its not acceptable to grieve for such a “win-win” situation. 

    When I tried to grieve my sadness was dismissed with sentiments like “But isn’t he with a good family?”, “Doesn’t he have a good life”, “You did the right thing.”.  In fact even a counselor who claimed to have both grief and loss and adoption experience uttered these words mere moments into our first (and only) session.

    Second grief is supposed to be temporary or at least deminish with time.  Adoption Grief isn’t like that. 

    If a widow still grieves with the same intensity years after her husbands passing I think she tends to get similar disapproval from society because she has failed to, “move on” or “get over it” (sound familiar?). 

    In my opinion adoption grief lasts for longer than that of other losses because we were never allowed to grieve in the first place AND because with each milestone our child reaches without us we experience a new loss. 

    So even if society accepted our grief they would still expect us to at some point “get over it”.  But even if I come to peace with the initial loss of placing I then I have to be able to grieve the loss of not being there for my son’s first smile.  His first step.  His first word.  His first EVERYTHING… These losses can be felt and grieved when they actually occur or when I witness another child meeting these milestones or both.

    Grief and loss professionals need to be educated about both the grief associated with this “win-win” situation as well as the recurring nature of this unique grief.

    Leave a comment »

    Titles – Just who is a birth mom these days?

    April 6, 2009 · Filed under Adoption, Grad School, Roommates, Think on it, venting

    Birth mom.  First mom.  Natural mom.  Original mom.  Real mom.  Biological mom.  Tummy mom.  Each appeals to some while offending others.  I personally have come to identify as a birth mom.  Not because I’m blind/deaf and don’t see what people type and hear what they say.  I have encountered those who use the term in a derogotory way.  I have heard and seen the sterotypes.  But I have also heard the love in my son’s voice as he tells people I am his birth mom. 

    I tend to use the conjoined birth/first or first/birth if I’m not sure of the preference of those who I am addressing or use whichever term is prefered by the person I’m speaking (typing) of or to.

    I’m sure I’ve said all of this before so why am I rehashing it now? Because of a video.  Stay with me it may take a minute to explain the connection. 

    This quarter I’m taking a course on Chemical Dependancy and in this week’s class we watched a video on FASD (Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder, which includes Fetal Alcohol Syndrome).  The video began with a woman explaining her journey to getting her daughter diagnoised.  Under her face as she spoke was label explaining who she was.  It said “Birth Mom and FAS Advocate”.  I’m not 100% sure of the second part but the first part of the title definately said birth mom. 

    I first began to wonder why her status as a birth mom mattered.  The topic she was speaking on was FAS did it matter that she’d relinquished parental rights?  Then I started to understand that she HADN’T relinquished her rights.  She was parenting her daughter and always had been. I became even more confused by her label of birth mom.  Perhaps she’d relinquished her parental rights to some other child but again why mention it on a video where she’s speaking about FAS and a child she obviously parented. 

    Then I figure it out.  They were not used the term “birth mom” to mean someone who had relinquished their parental rights.  they were using it to apply to any of the moms who’d given birth to their children as opposed to the foster and adoptive moms. 

    Technically this application of the label makes more sense if you just look at the words.  Birth mom, a mom who gave birth.  Yep makes sense. EXCEPT that the definition of birth mom isn’t a mom who gave birth.  Someone decided that a birth mom is a mom who relinquishes her parental rights and over time this is the definition that has been accepted (and sometimes despised).

    So here’s my point.  If you’re going to give a group of people a label to segregate them (and thats what lables do) then you can’t apply that same label to a different group of people who do not share the defining characteristics.

    And by the way this applies to all you people involved in foster care who refer to the parents of foster youth as birth parents.  They aren’t birth parents, they haven’t relinquished parental rights or had them terminated.

    If one wanted to re-do the labels and apply logic to the situation here’s one way to do it.  Birth mom would become exactly what is sounds like.  A mom who gave birth regardless of parenting status.  Any woman who is a mom would be called a mom.  Simple right? First, Foster, Adoptive, Biological, and Step (and any other prefix you can think of) would ONLY be used when necessary to avoid confusion.

    But I don’t have that power and obviously logic has no place in this life.  So I will continue to be a birth mom because no matter how un- politically correct it is.  Any time I hear or see that term now I am transported back to our day at the pool and hear Kidlet’s voice filled with love and pride as he tried to recruit his friends to help him splash me, his birth mom.

    **This was originally wittier but when I went to post it I found out the hard way my roommate had disabled the wireless and it was gone by the time I fixed that. (TG can I get that ninja up here please?)**

    Comments (8) »

    Some thoughts from my sickbed*

    January 30, 2009 · Filed under Adoption, Television, Think on it, Thoughts from my sickbed, venting

    *Or a post in which I am judgemental and possibly piss a lot of people off

    While watching TV I saw a teaser for a news story on “designer children” about a fertility clinic offering couples the chance to choose the gender of their children.  It also talked about future possiblities of letting the couples choose hair and eye color and genes that were more likely to produce healthier children.  At first I was disgusted  but as I began to think about it especially as I watched the full news story I realized its actually not all that different from adoption today.

    **Before I go any further I want to make it clear that the following isn’t to generalize ALL adoptive parents/potential adoptive parents or even MOST adoptive parents/potential adoptive parents.  However no example is fabricated.  Each was seen with my own eyes or heard with my own ears.  So somewhere out there in the adoption world these types of people exist.  I also know that not ALL agencies allow these types of practices.

    Choice about gender:

    This seems to be the least controversal choice in the adoption world.  It seems that gender choice is an accepted perk of adoption so why all the controversy that a fertility clinic is offering the same service?

    I can understand gender preference. It makes sense. I have imagined myself parenting a little girl ever since I was a little girl. I hope my next pregnancy is a girl.  DOes that mean if its a boy I wont want him? NO! It just means that I’ll need to pick a different name, because I’m not sure my son could pull off Elizabeth.

    So I just don’t understand how you can claim to want to be a parent so badly.  Be SO upset by the wait and then end a match or turn down multiple possible matches because of gender.

    I’m sorry but once you get picky you loose your ability to complain about wait times and have me take you seriously.

    If you admit that your desire to only parent a child of a certain gender is selfish and if you dont’ complain about how long it will take you to get a match I will still disagree with your choice but I’ll have more respect for you.

    Choices about appearance:

    In adoption it seems people know this one comes off as in bad taste/vain/selfish/ stupid.  I”ve mostly seen this less overtly than the gender desires.  I’ve recently come across an adoptive mother giving advice to other potential adoptive parents that they should insist on seeing a picture of the expectant parents before agreeing to match.  This way they could make sure the baby would “fit” in their family.  I’ve seen similar advice as a way to make sure you get a “pretty baby” .  Each time I throw up a little in my mouth.

    Choices about health:

    Again this is one I understand.  Everyone hopes their baby is healthy.  But it still doesn’t sit well with me when paps who claim to want nothing more than to be a parent turn down matches with even the smallest chance of a health issue.  And genetic engineering to produce a baby with healthier genes has me on guard.

    Choices about race:

    This is not related to the news story but while I”m on the subject lets talk about it shall we.

    Race is a hard topic on its own.  Combining it with adoption sure doesn’t make it any easier to navigate but I’ll try anyway.

    I’m not in favor of only allowing same race placements.  I’m also not in favor of allowing people to adopt children of different races just because they checked the box and claim they can handle it.

    I know grouping up a minority in this country isn’t easy. I can only imagine what grouping up in the country as a minority and an adoptee is like.  So yes if you want to adopt outside your race your homestudy SHOULD take an intensive look at your motivations, your community, your support system, your extended family etc.  So I really am sick of reading/hearing people whine about it.

    I’m not saying you have to go and find you some minority friends, because lets face it a friendship built on those motivations wont last.  What I am saying is take a look around.  Are there minorities that live on your block? In your neighborhood? Will your child be the only one of color at his/her school? Will your child be able to see people who look like them in a positive way in your immediate surroundings?  Will they hear positive things about people who look like them?

    I’m sorry but even if you are wonderful people with the purest of motivations if you live in KKK country  with no diversity in sight it is not in the best interest of a minority child to be adopted by you no matter how many “trainings” your agency offers.

    Those who want to adopt a black child because the fees are less expensive shoudl be weeded out and while we’re at it lets get rid of those who are open to bi-racial “because mixed babies are so pretty” or choose to adopt from China because “she’ll look just like a porcelain doll”.

    All these things especially drive me crazy when they come from someone who also wants adoption to be more like pregnancy as in the wait time should be no more than 9 months.  Which doesn’t even make sense because if you take into account the amount of time couples are trying to conceive even a traditional birth from pregnancy can take more than 9 months. But lets just say you’re right and it just takes 9months-  You want it to be more like a pregnancy?

    Ok so here are your choices.  Do you want to be a parent? Yes or No?  If the answer is yes you get to parent the first child who becomes available for adoption (in correspondence to where you are on the wait list).  Thats it.  That is your only choice. No gender choices, no appearance choices, the social worker will determine if you are qualified to parent a child of another race but you dont get to pick the race you think is the “prettiest”.

    Oh wait.  You don’t like that plan?  You want all your choices AND a quicker turn around time?  Well tough shit.  Adoption isn’t about you.  Or at least it shouldn’t be.

    Comments (8) »

    Homework Help…yet again

    January 6, 2009 · Filed under Adoption, Grad School, PhD program search, Think on it

    It seems like I’m always asking you guys for something and this quarter is no exception.

    A bit of background for those who don’t know. I’m currently in the second year of a three year Masters in Social Work program.  This quarter I am in a research class.  We have to spend the quarter writing a research proposal and literature review.  Next quarter we’ll actually have to complete the research project.

    In class tonight the prof asked if any of us were considering applying to PhD programs.  Since I am he told me I should think about completeing something that would be publishable. Having a published paper would certainly help in the application process as I consider schools in the future.  So I spoke with him and let him know my area of interest is Adoption specifically birth parents.  He suggested I do something with birth parents and facebook but didn’t give me any more than those two words.

    I’m not required to go with his suggestion although since his area of interest involves the internet and social work it may be wise to do something along those lines.  But I have this entire week to think about it and flesh it out before taking a first stab at it.  I have to turn in a paragraph about my topic next tuesdays January 13 at 6pm.

    So between now and then help me out.  What do we want to know about birth moms.  Or perhaps the more important question is what do we want social workers to know about birth moms? If you have ideas that fall within the birth moms and internet/facebook idea the prof suggested great but if not I’d love to hear your input as well.

    Once again thanks for all your thoughts and help!

    Comments (1) »

    Not so bad?

    December 11, 2008 · Filed under Adoption, Television, Think on it

    A little over an hour ago I vented.  I’m feeling better now.  And with my calmer demeanor I have a gentler perspective regarding all this adoption on TV.

    Its not perfect.  There are a lot of stereotypes that are getting shown and not a lot counteracting that.  BUT things are improving.

    Izzy on Grey’s Anatomy is a birth mom. Her storyline hasn’t showcased that fact in a LONG time but that just shows that we aren’t one dimensional.  She is also a doctor, a friend, a roommate, a girlfriend, and at the moment delusional.  She is not all consumed she does have a life.

    Brother’s & Sister’s really needs to stop using the term “our birthmother” but they are showing a potential birth mom who possesses postive traits.  She is an adult, educated, professional (doctor), who stands up for herself.

    Private Practice ok I haven’t seen the entire episode because like I said earlier I turned it off when it started pissing me off. BUT the pregnant woman was not on drugs she was not a teenager (well age wasn’t discussed that I rememer but she was in her 3rd year of college so I’m assuming at least 20).

    So no, none of these storylines are perfect but they are bringing domestic infant adoption to the attention of the masses beyond what is seen in Lifetime movies.  Are there stupid people out there who will believe that all women considering adoption are just in it for the expenses? Could they use this to defend calling their child’s birth mom “our birthmom”? Or say “Izzy moved on why can’t you?”? Sure,that could and more than likely will happen.

    But I’m hoping that a majority of people will see past what is seen in an hour long episode of a sitcom. I’m hoping that this is one step in normalizing the reality we live.  I’m hoping that script writers will continue this journey away from portraying us as baby snatching crack whores and come closer to showing the real normal people we are.

    Hey a girl can hope right?

    Leave a comment »

    Science and Religion not mutually exclusive?

    November 3, 2008 · Filed under Movies, Religion, Think on it

    I will preface this post by stating clearly I am not religious.  I searched for a long time in vain for a religion I could connect with but have become content with being spiritual and not religious. After all religion…well that’s another thought for another post.

    I recently went with SisterFriend to see Religulous.  In it Bill Mahr goes to various religious locations and asks people simple questions in a very non-mocking manning.

    (aside: I was disappointed by the non-mocking its the second movie I’ve gone to recently where I expected to be entertained by mocking and found none)

    As part of his travels Mahr stopped at two places that depict dinosaurs and humans living together.  One of the men explains (AND i’M PARAPHRASING) that this is because in the bible tells us that god created man and animal on the same day.  If we don’t believe that the dinosaurs and humans lived at the same time we don’t believe the bible and will burn in hell.  (ok I added the burn in hell part but it was SO implied) A guy at the second location while explaining something else (and to be honest I dont remember exactly what but I think it had to do with why god hasn’t taken out satan yet) explained that one of god’s days is like 10 thousand human days so we can’t expect god to act in accordance with our timeline (again PARAPHRASING).

    So it took me very little time to piece together the following: God created man and animal on the same day, however since his days are like many many MANY human days dinosaurs and humans never shared the earth.  Dinosaurs were created they died off and humans came to be.  Oh and btw how do you know evolution isn’t one of the tools god used to bring humans into being?

    See simple you can believe in god and the bible and still not deny science.

    But what do I know? I’m not religious and am probably going to burn in hell because after all being a good person means nothing if you arn’t a good Christian, Muslim, Morman, Catholic, __fill in the blank__.

    Oh and btw the ice analogy is fantabulous.  Not fantabulous enough to convert me but still fantabulous!

    Leave a comment »

    Laws no good if unclear

    October 11, 2008 · Filed under Adoption, Politics, Think on it

    Yes, this is another post about safe haven laws.  No, its not about Nebraska.

    A woman near where I live was charged with abandoning her child.  She gave birth and then took the baby to a church.  She admits to having done this.  The key is she thought the church was a legal safe haven site.

    Now I’m not going to pretend this woman did everything right.  I believe whole heartedly that if you are going to utilize safehaven, or any other law for that matter, you should do some research and make sure you know without a doubt your actions fall into those perameters.

    But shouldn’t there be some way to make the details of the law known?  I’m a bit of a policy nerd so I know the url to our state legislature website by heart.  (ok I’m a HUGE policy nerd) This morning after reading the article I went to the website to find out what our state considers to be legal safe haven spots. Because as active I am in policy and adoption and even taking into consideration I wrote a paper on safe haven less than 1 year ago, I had no idea where one could legally take an infant to utilize the safe haven law.

    Well the search by key word feature is down on the website and silly me I dont know the citation so can’t look it up by number.  I googled and found a brief outline of our policy and link to the actual law.  Unfortunately, the link didn’t work.

    Based on what I found on various websites, which I cannot verify because I cant access the law.  In my state the only legal safehaven locations are hospital ers and manned firestations. Ok those locations make sense but shoudln’t there be a way to make that information known?

    I dont have an answer.  I know we dont have the revenue to advertise the details of every law on the books.  It just seems sad that this woman is being charged for something she thought was legal and in the best interest of her child.

    Leave a comment »

    Ahhh Nebraska

    October 8, 2008 · Filed under Adoption, Think on it, venting

    I’ve been super busy recently and neglectful of my blog.  I keep realzing my neglect and swearing that tomorrow or next week I’ll be more attentive.  Somehow tomorrow or next week are always the same.  I jot down notes on topic I want to address but days pass and I dismiss my notes as outdated and no longer worthy of posting.  One of the topics I keep meaning to address s the Nebraska safe haven law.

    I read about it; was aghast; jotted down notes; got distracted.  BUT THEN people started actually utilizing the law and I thought. “Oh I guess I can make that post afterall” but again I got distracted.  And then the sibling group was abandoned. And once more distraction. But now children are being imported from other states so that their parents can take advantage of Nebraska’s stellar law.

    Wow Nebraska you should be so proud for being on the cutting edge (full snark intended).

    I’m not an expert on Nebraska but in my state I know of several services parents can turn to if they are having a challenging time.  Services range from in home family counseling to the ability to file an At risk youth petition which would court order your child to obey rules follow curfew etc and allow you to file contempt charges if the child doesn’t follow through. I know teens are challenging.  I know I was challenging. I have worked with some of the most challenging teens there are while they were recieving behavior rehabilitation services at a residential center.   I get that parents may get overwhelmed at times. BUT THATS NOT THE INTENT OF SAFE HAVEN LAWS.

    I’ll admit safe haven laws don’t really do what they were intended to do.  They were created as a way to hopefully stop those mothers who leave their infants to die after birth.  Instead they give a totally different set of women a way to relinquish their children with anonymity.  Not their original intent but still a far cry from allowing parents to get rid of unruly teens.

    Oh and the whole point of safe haven laws is that a parent can utilize them and not face abandonment charges well that also may change in Nebraska

    a spokeswoman for the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services, said that despite the safe-haven law, the state could seek to press other charges, including child neglect charges, against those that abandon children.

    ahhh good ol Nebraska

    Leave a comment »

    Violation of Privacy?

    July 26, 2008 · Filed under Adoption, Think on it

    I’m not going to respond on the forum.  I just don’t have the energy for a huge forum debate but it was one of those things that made me go “hmmm” and so I will write about it here.  There is a conversation going on about what a huge violation of privacy it is to send pictures of a child to that child’s first parent(s).

    Just when I’d heard every possible “reason” (read: excuse) as to why some adoptive parents don’t believe is sending first parents updates I stubble across this one.  What made it even more perplexing is that as I was reading I was waiting for someone to challenge this view, that challenge didn’t come.  Instead others were having “wow I’d never thought of it like that maybe I should re-think sending pictures” moments.  Now maybe I’m cynical but I automatically read those statements more like “wow thank you so much I’ve been trying to find a way to back out of sending pictures but haven’t been able to come up with an excuse so thanks for providing me one”

    Others said they’d keep sending pictures until their child asked them to stop.  This sounds good at first but then you have to wonder…If little bobby asks that no more pictures be sent to Aunt Suzy and Katie requests all pictures of her stop being sent to grandma will these parents honor their children’s privacy in those situations too?

    eta: I wrote this post after only browsing the thread upon further look there is a bit of challenging going on.  Thanks to the those who get that sending your child’s first parents pictures is not a violation of their privacy.

    Comments (3) »

    « Previous entries
    Next Page »