Quote:
Originally Posted by greekdee
Okay, you guys need to clue me in -- I'm not getting what is so disturbing about the word "condition."
|
It wasn't one word,
it was the whole phrase.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KSUViolet06
That type of interaction would have NEVER happened when say, my mom was a teen. They had the stories of girls getting pregnant and "going away" for 9 months. Then coming back after having given up their babies for adoption. No one ever talked about it. They never got to see their kids (until years later when they were adults.) It was all very hush hush and adoptive parents wouldnt dream of speaking to the birth mom. They got the bare minimum of info about the parents because everything was so discreet.
|
Closed adoptions have NEVER prevented the mother from telling the (usually) doctor who's facilitating the adoption "I have a family history of breast cancer, my dad's dad had a heart condition, etc etc." If the woman didn't share that, it's because she didn't know herself. If she was impregnated by a man she never saw again, it's pretty hard to know what his medical history is.
My cousin is adopted. It was through the family doctor and supposedly (this is what someone started to tell my mom in the grocery store one day, but she put her hands over her ears and said LALALALALALA) the mother was a teenage daughter from a prominent family in town. He has never had any interest in knowing who his bio parents were - I'm probably more curious about it than he is, just by virtue of writing this post. I know that there were some other cases where people wanted to keep adoptions closed, but they had to tell the kids because of the fear that they'd end up dating their half-siblings.
Have the information on file, but you don't have to look at it if you don't want to. I almost think that things have swung too far the other way nowadays, and there's a pressure to keep things open even if one or several of the parties (birth parents, adoptive parents, child) would really rather not.
Threaded Mode
