Adoption? To tell or not to tell???

[IDLEchild]

At what age is it wise to let forth the knowledge to the child that he/she is adopted? Should they be told at all? Or should you, in all seriousness, tell them after you die via a leter or recorded message? Should the child have the right to know and the choice to want to discover his/her biological parents, to ask why and know the truth? Anyone here adopted? if yes, how did it feel when you heard of such information?

 

[Rose]

Very intersting subject. It's a bit tricky, I think. I guess I pretty well believe that children should be told, at proper age of course. That age shouldn't be set by a strict number, but be based on the maturity and emotional capabilities of the child in question. For instance, some kids know from a very small child and that's okay with them. Others are told at age 16, 18, 21, et cetra.

I'm not adopted, but my brother is. [[cut out long story]] Basically he was told as a child, I forget how old though. As far as I know, he's known most of his life. At age 18 he signed the paperwork with the adoption agency so that information about his "biological" parents could be known. Once mom signed the papers a couple years after she found out he did - they met up.

So ... yeah, I think adopted kids should be told at some time in their life.

 

[IDLEchild]

Very intersting subject. It's a bit tricky, I think. I guess I pretty well believe that children should be told, at proper age of course. That age shouldn't be set by a strict number, but be based on the maturity and emotional capabilities of the child in question.

Uh-Huh...this is what i was thinking originally. Depends on the character and personality of the child or the adult involved in this situation. The child deserves to know but there are those self-destructive individuals.

*edit

I also wanted to add that some childern and adults can seem fine (average EQ) but after being told such they could turn for the worse, exhibit maladaptive behavior and other such destructive remarks. How does one make sure that the person is ready for such a eye opening knowledge.

A lot of kids misplace their position in the family after such is told to them. They feel less accepted then their brothers and sisters who are born to their biological parents. I think teen years are not the best time to let open the pandora's box. A little bit of truth to change their outlook on life and their primary relations.

 

[freako104]

at some point they should be told. cant say exactly when but id tell them sooner myself and be there for tehm as if they were my own. if they chose to seek out their biological parents id let them and even help them.

 

[Squiggy]

I was 33 when I found out my kids were adopted... ...Really threw me for a loop...

 

[Rose]

I was 33 when I found out my kids were adopted... ...Really threw me for a loop...

Wishing your kids were adopted isn't the same as "finding out" they were.

 

[Squiggy]

I stand by my statement...

 

[tonksy]

i think that if you are open and honest from the get go everything should be fine. maybe it's when you hide it that the children get hurt. if i ever adopt a baby, i'll not keep it a secret. i remember a story about an adopted girl. someone told her that her parenets didn't love her as much as if she was their own, to which she turned and said, "my parents chose me, yours got stuck with you." amen, sister.

 

[Gotnolegs]

Tell your child as soon as they ask, or if they don't ask soon as it crops up in conversation. Children should grow up knowing their background, if they know their parents love them they won't care, the problems occur when teenagers find out their parents didn't tell them.

Knowing the bastard teenager I turned into, it isn't worth taking the risk. I caused enough trouble for my parents even when I found out my sister was lying when she told me I was adopted...

 

[Gonz]

I was 6 or 7. Tell 'em early & it won't be any big deal.

The biologiacal parents thing is highly overrated. Need history? Test your DNA for recognizable things. Need you mommy? She's the one that put in the effort, years & tears to raise you. Don't know your heritage? You're American. (or whatever country you were born in).

The woman that birthed you didn't need/want a kid. She had her reasons. Leave her alone.

 

[Squiggy]

Uh oh...I...ummmm....a...agr....agree.

 

[Nixy]

The woman that birthed you didn't need/want a kid. She had her reasons. Leave her alone.

Nope, don't agree

My mom is good friends with a lady who gave a baby up for adoption. She was like 17 or something when she got pregnant. Her parents made her go to Michigan from the Toronto area to have the baby and made he put it up for adoption. She never could have any other kids (some medical reason that arose after the first one) and everyday of her life missed and wanted to meet that baby boy.

Unless both the mother and the "child" have gone to the adoption agency expressing an interest then nothing will be done. Even then the child is given the means to contact that mother (at first through the agency then directly) and they can give her their address, etc if they choose. They never just contact one party cause the other party wants them to (unless both parties have gone to the agency to find each other).

So, in short, I believe that it isn't always the case that the mother doesn't want the child and I don't see anythign wrong with going through the agency to find each other cause nothing will be done unless you both express an interest.

 

[Gotnolegs]

Nope, don't agree

My mom is good friends with a lady who gave a baby up for adoption. She was like 17 or something when she got pregnant. Her parents made her go to Michigan from the Toronto area to have the baby and made he put it up for adoption. She never could have any other kids (some medical reason that arose after the first one) and everyday of her life missed and wanted to meet that baby boy.

Unless both the mother and the "child" have gone to the adoption agency expressing an interest then nothing will be done. Even then the child is given the means to contact that mother (at first through the agency then directly) and they can give her their address, etc if they choose. They never just contact one party cause the other party wants them to (unless both parties have gone to the agency to find each other).

So, in short, I believe that it isn't always the case that the mother doesn't want the child and I don't see anythign wrong with going through the agency to find each other cause nothing will be done unless you both express an interest.

The laws aren't the same in the UK but that's another whole thread...

 

[Squiggy]

I would think that the decision to place a child for adoption, regardless of reason, should be absolute. It shouldn't have an "until I get it together" clause attached. The whole idea is to give the child a chance at a normal, wholesome, and complete life. Unless a woman was forced into placing a child for adoption, I don't see that they should have rights at a later date. If, however, a child seeks his/her biological parents, a reunion would be their decision.

I feel like I'm speaking in circles...

 

[Rose]

The woman that birthed you didn't need/want a kid. She had her reasons. Leave her alone.

I'm with Nixy. I disagree, too.

This may be the case for the *most* part, but there are always circumstances. In my first post in this thread I gave an example of someone who was adopted and reunited with his birth mother. She both needed, wanted, and loved her child from the minute he was born and still continues to do so. Even if she did have to put him up for adoption for circumstances that weren't quite controllable.

There are always exceptions. Always.

 

[Gonz]

I would think that the decision to place a child for adoption, regardless of reason, should be absolute. It shouldn't have an "until I get it together" clause attached. The whole idea is to give the child a chance at a normal, wholesome, and complete life. Unless a woman was forced into placing a child for adoption, I don't see that they should have rights at a later date. If, however, a child seeks his/her biological parents, a reunion would be their decision.

OK Gonz, how did you get Squiggys password

 

[Squiggy]

This is getting scarey....

 

[Gonz]

I'm with Nixy. I disagree, too.

This may be the case for the *most* part, but there are always circumstances. In my first post in this thread I gave an example of someone who was adopted and reunited with his birth mother. She both needed, wanted, and loved her child from the minute he was born and still continues to do so. Even if she did have to put him up for adoption for circumstances that weren't quite controllable.

There are always exceptions. Always.

IF she wants contact, she'll have her name on soem register. If it isn't, leave her alone.

 

[Mare]

There is an age/time/place.. to tell children what they need to hear. As far as adoption goes, never in that position-but-sooner or later -certain things may occur that triggers a question that the child might have-and as taking my 9 yr. old to counseling, I am finding that children today at certain ages-should be told certain things, because you dont want to break the trust/bond between that parent and child.

GREAT thread - buttcrackdivine

Karma-karma-karma for U !!!

 

[IDLEchild]

IF she wants contact, she'll have her name on soem register. If it isn't, leave her alone.

Yes, i agree. It is up to the willing mother to choose whether she leaves open the possibility for her child to confront her in the future. Many don't, but many do. Mothers who leave their kids in the trash bins or on subways deserve to have that option taken away from them.