Monday, September 14, 2009

Assuming A New Identity



After a particularly stressful church service in which JoJo was absolutely awful, in total contrast to Paloma who was being nearly angelic, I practically stormed back home, loudly dragging out my big black cast iron skillet for burrito therapy, forgetting how soothing I also have discovered painting to be, such a mindless activity, like using crayolas in a coloring book, either way I'm not that great about staying within the lines.

Chuck has now added window alarms, exterior door alarms - this for a girl who hates shut windows and locked doors - but has found it sadly necessary.

Yolie and I started painting the hall walls with a polyurethane over the wood, while listening to the Braves-Cardinals game, a combined super-soother for me especially, so emboldened by the immediate and positive turn of events that we also knocked out the first coat of paint in the Bubba's bathroom, both of us conversing about the adoption class she was teaching and transposing thoughts over our own family here.

A right brain/left brain kind of thing with Yolie, Sarah and I. My conversations with either girl would bore the snot out of the other one. Deep environmental, food production discussions with Sarah; deep psyche, adoption/foster care behavioral issues with Yolie. A common denominator would be that of human behavior overall and Sarah'd called with a fascinating New York Times Magazine article about how our friends affect us in so many ways, even the sizes of our bodies and if we have optimistic outlooks in life.

I have thought, thought, and thought for a week or so about my friend, Amy, and a post she wrote. Twenty-five years ago it would've alarmed and saddened me, now after more than 20 years of being beat up emotionally and sometimes physically, I'm starting to understand and agree. These are the kinds of conversations I have with Yolie all the time as she's been re-entering the adoption social worker world professionally.

I met Amy several years ago in Toledo at AAN, we'd known each other in an internet group for a long time, and this was right before both she and I ended up being plunged into some terribly despairing, soul-destroying years in the adoption world, a very different planet. The article about happiness explains how we all form new normals at some point, especially after traumatic events. Eventually adoptive parents have to work on their own emotional recovery, trying to regain normalcy.

Amy's allowing me to reprint her entire post and I'd add a possible thought as well. Maybe PCAs - personal care attendants - might be a possible remedy or intervention in a birth family home? My children, once original sibling groups, mainly from Texas, overall could not have remained in their birth homes, but I've read a ton of cases over the years in which the possibility might have been there for other children if more help had been provided.

Yolie and her two siblings needed to get out of Texas for their own future survival as did some of my other children. I wonder though about Edgar's sibling group, could the birth parents, with massive amounts of aide, supervision and inhome attendants, could they possibly have parented their seven children? Or would the inherent, deeply ingrained violent tendencies have destroyed everyone? What about my other children with their severe mental disturbances? Did foster care and emergency shelters, institutions and programs further exacerbate an impossible situation? I have no answers.

The bottom line though is that I've been resented for YEARS for not being the birth mom, an emotionally crippling resentment for many of my children. Yet when they grow up, leave home, and don't have me to kick around every day, I've not seen a lot of improvement in their living circumstances.

This severe, primal, possible unhealable break with a parental figure, Amy's coining of the phrase 'assuming a new identity' in adoption verbiage, stayed on my mind all week. Overall Yolie found these thoughts to be alarming at first, later agreeing in quite a few cases.

From Amy:
My husband and I have adopted 14 children from state foster care (in addition to the 5 biological children we have). We began adopting over 13 years ago. Because of this decision we have had many heartbreaks and many challenges. We have had social services turn on us and investigate us because of things the children have done and then tried to blame on us by lying. We have had to remove children because of extremely harmful behavior. After living with these children and their heartache, we had come to realize a few things about the foster/adoption system in this country-mainly it doesn't work.

Here are my thoughts on this:

1. Children are removed far too much. Many of the children in my home were removed because their parents were drug addicts and bad/neglectful parents but they were not physically harming the children. They should have been left alone. The parents should have been prosecuted for the drugs but other that the kids should have remained. Yes, their lives would have been hard and they would probably pick up some really bad habits. However, no where is there a guarantee against bad parents (aren't we all from time to time). These kids fared worse being pulled out and then at an older age expected to assume a whole new identity and be happy about it. If you were taken from your home and put in another one and then were told this is your new family and that you had to like it- would you? No, you would rebel which is what all these kids have done. Further, after having been put through the social services nightmare and realizing that the only way we could win was by hiring a big, bully lawyer we understand how these parents get their kids taken, even if they try to clean up their act. If you don't have money to fight them, you cannot win once they have it in their heads to destroy you. Social services answers to no-one and they are way too powerful.

2. If a child is physically being harmed, remove them to a safe place (ie foster care) and allow them to remain until the situation is no longer harmful or until they reach adulthood. Do not expect them to take on a new identity-even if they are very young. Don't expect them to call you Mom and Dad but let them understand that you are protecting them until such time as they can hopefully return home. In addition, the parents must be prosecuted and jailed if they are harming their child. This will send a message to others that harming a child is a crime!!

3. In the best situation, the church and community should step in to care for children being harmed so a child does not have to move from their own geographical location.

4. The only children who should be adopted are true orphans - children who have been either abandoned by their biological parents or whose parents have died and there is no extended family who can take them in.

These are of course my opinions, however, almost all adoptive families I know are living lives of extreme difficulty because they tried to help a child, usually a child that just wanted to stay with their own families, despite the parents bad behavior. The system is broken and children and the families that attempt to help them continue to be damaged because of it. Their is so much more to write about this subject and i hope to do so in the future...

16 comments:

Becky said...

That's a lot to chew on, especially since lately I've been feeling a strong pull to return my son to his birth mother, even though that would be nearly impossible now. I love my kids dearly, but the whole situation is starting to feel very wrong. I wish there were better options for mothers and families.

Fatcat said...

It's very difficult. Social services is in a position where they have to try and predict the future behavior of the birth parents. Will the child be okay going home? A lot of people argue that the birth parents get too many chances to clean up their act. I don't know. I keep thinking of this foster baby I see at church - 15 broken bones at the age of 4 months. No, not osteogenesis imperfecta, just meanness, but one of the parents is claiming ignorance/innocence. What to do? There are no easy answers. There's so much gray area, it's unbelievable.

I do think that mental health services ought to be going on all the time, mandatory. They require that we get the child to a pediatrician within 48 hours of them entering our homes, they should also require a psychologist to see the child within 48 hours and from then on and the states should pay for it. They might save a lot of prison costs later.

Praying for you all.

Anonymous said...

Really something to chew on. It all just reminds me and brings home the fact that God created the family to be a picture of Himself, His love for us, His devotion and sacrifice for us, etc. And when the family breaks, nothing in life is what it was meant to be. Of course, there is healing and redemption, but the longing to be part of that original family, healthy, loving, complete...this all says a lot about God's original plan for humans, man's sin nature, and the results we sometimes suffer for a lifetime when one or more of us doesn't accept His redemption and subsequently live our lives back in praise to Him. If that all makes sense. What longing we humans have to be loved, honored as one of God's creations, and wrapped in everlasting arms of love. Makes us cry for the heartache of those who don't receive this in their birth families. Can you just imagine God's tears? I'm at a loss as to how to even grasp the heartache and depravity that effects us all.
Nancy in Iowa

Lori in KY said...

I'm definitely going to spend some time working all this out in my head--very provocative thoughts. Thank you for posting this...

Cindy said...

Yeah, y'all, my head is still spinning at the thought - but the fact that it makes sense in many instances blows me away.

yolie said...

The glaring fact, though, is that we cannot predict which kids will and which kids won't benefit from an adoptive home. As I mentioned when we were talking through this, I left El Paso screaming and crying, holding on to the chairs in the airport. I DID NOT WANT TO BE ADOPTED...and yet, here I am. Had someone listened to me saying I couldn't "switch identities," I'd be lost now. Maybe it's also an issue of the adoptive parents having to re-focus what adoption actually means. For some, the fact that they adopted simply means they housed children who could not stay in their bio. families (and in doing so, had lots of pain and heartache). For others, adoption means they added a very substantial and real family member. It's that simple...well, kind of. It's all the emotions that are thrown in because we are human and choose to love broken children that makes it so much more. I also stand by my feeling that since such an overwhelming majority of children in foster care go back home, those who are elegible for adoption really come from the "cream of the crop" of unfit parents. You can't MAKE someone protect thier child. You can't MAKE someone choose the child over drugs and alcohol. So, I offer no answers. Just a small voice that screams how glad I am nobody thought to give my bio. mom yet another chance to destroy what was left of me.

Cindy said...

Yolie, that's POWERFUL. I'm glad too. Love, your mama

Amy said...

Yolie and Cindy-

I posted a follow up to what I wrote before- it may clarify a little bit more of my thoughts on this issue...

I have a Yolie too, her name is Gina... I also have lots of Palomas...:-)

Cindy said...

Amy, may I publicly post the link to your blog?

Lisa said...

I would have vehemently disagreed with Amys' statements 10 years ago, 5 years ago, even now for a few of my kids - HOWEVER, there are some children whose psyches are just plain stuck and I agree with what she's saying now. I have fantasized about sending my 15 yo back to his bio-grandmother since she claims she wanted him (and his sisters) so badly but we were picked to adopt them over her (she subsequently adopted their youngest sib when she was born a year later). I'm sure every bad thing he would do around her would be my fault since she didn't get to raise him like she wanted, but there are days when I could care less about any of that. There are days when he glares at me and talks like he has it all figured out about his bio-family (he was removed at 10 mos so he knows little to nothing) and how he's going to go back to them the second he can. Initially it broke my heart. After awhile I started to realize that he's not like me or my husband or any of our bio kids in the slightest. I would never choose someone with his personality/attitude as a friend. I would probably avoid him at all costs if I encountered him in a store or other public place. If my husband or any man treated me the way he does, I'd dump him in a heartbeat. Sometimes I just plain don't like him at all. I think, as an adult, I can differentiate between loving him and liking him though. I always love him and remember that helpless baby he was, not the vindictive, mean child he became. The unfortunate reality is that he is mentally ill, he will never love us like we love him. He will always resent us and go out of his way to hurt us - that's just the way he's made. Would staying with his bio-family have made him a better person? Probably not, but he probably wouldn't be as bitter. Would he have been abused? Also, probably not. It's unfortunate that so many of us end up suffering because we want to save these kids.

Sharon said...

OMG...I can't believe I blogged about almost the same subject today !

Anonymous said...

yeah Yolie,

and IMHO NO this would not work and would have been SOOOO unfair, not right, unjust to my Sarah and Julie...

my Michael.. his b-mom, what I know of her, he'd been just as well off with her, maybe... I don't know...

My girls would have been severely hurt by have those blankity $#%*&%## SWs in there lives....

they needed a forever, real mom... and not to have some &%&^$&^%$ cuss word cuss word, SW come and snatch them away,...

I'd of lost them during the "homeless years" I would not have been able to homeschool them; make decisions to not have them on psychotropics, place them on far better private health care, provide for their overall care without interferance from some cuss word cuss word SW... choose to stop really crappy RAD cult attachment therapy... be able to take son to really awesome horse therapy... fight the school district and choose to homeschool or place child in private...

or another big kicker would have been forced visits with bios that sexually abused them... that is what cuss word cuss word SWs did to us, just some of all the crap they did to us... MY children...

all the many many many things you can't do for children who belong are owned to/by the government...

and thank you Yolie for not being one of those SWs...

my solution is, instead of treating us adoptive parents like dog poop ... HELP US WITH THESE KIDS, when we ask... don't make us suffer...

but don't take adoption away from all the Sarahs, Julies, and even Michaels out there that need it... life is better, no one is taking them anywhere... I could write a book in decent...

groups of paid people never make a better parent then a person who just wants to be part of the child's life without any money involved...

Rinda

Anonymous said...

Rinda,
Some of my thoughts, exactly.
I totally think that its dead on that some kids should not be adopted. I agree with Yolie, and Claudia, on her blog today that it's really hard to know which kids those are.
Permanent foster care has horrible disadvantages though as the child cannot have a 'parent'. By this I mean that the 'parent' really isn't responsible for the decision making.
One very good reason to adopt is so that when the child has a need I can meet it, when the child has a want I can give an answer, I can do these things without consulting caseworkers, bio parents, etc. I don't believe that these people should be cut out of the LIFE, but one person should be responsible for the DECISIONS.
At the moment, I am also mulling exactly how difficult the children would be if they kept that house of cards all together...the dynamics of I'll tell my mom, and mom is still mom, legally...that could get ugly. Sure, some children may appreciate still having ties and contact with that family, but the troublesome ones, those are the ones that are going to use it against us.
ALOT to think about.

yolie said...

My very good friend and foster care supervisor, Audrey, says that "permanency does not guarantee a good outcome, it only guarantees that there will be someone there to lean on when a bad outcome happens."

Cindy said...

Maybe even, TOO much to think about

Cindy said...

Maybe even, TOO much to think about