Holiday Aftermath and Adoption Thoughts

Christmas went all right – there was hope my eldest brother would join us for the first time since Mom’s funeral over five years ago, but that fell through. My SIL tried to run Christmas night and I said no, let me relax a minute, and I called when we went in for presents. Dad was standoffish but much better than last year’s rude rush out. Overall, it went well with no big drama, and that’s my #1 aim.

I played up the excitement of Santa on Christmas morning, and although Boy’s only 2 and lags developmentally, he seemed to ‘get it.’ He knew something good was in those wrapped boxes and colorful bags, and that they were for him. After tearing the paper a few times on the first box, he was off and running – he made a splendid mess. “Santa” held off on getting Boy all the stuff “Santa” wanted because “Santa” knew he was going to make out like a bandit later in the day (the grands and the auntie went nuts!). Nevertheless, Boy got lots of loot… and it was so much fun. He latched on to the little Clifford the Red Dog sent by DH’s aunt and to the Fisher-Price telephone (the one we ALL had as kids, just with big black Manga-type eyes instead of the blue rimmed ones in the classic version) that Santa brought – his big thing is telephones right now. It’s great. What fun!!

~~

BB picked up her blog again and has posted about her new blessing.

~~

Twice in the last week, DH has brought up the thought of a sibling for Boy: once at DH’s friends’ house as he was enthralled by their six year old son, and the other as Boy latched onto his cousin, my sister’s son. DH is getting to the point of saying “Yeah, it’s gotta be done.”

As I’ve posted before, I’ve been ready for the last several months to start the whole arduous paperchase all over again. I have to be patient. I think the time is about right, since (as it stands now) Boy will be starting preschool next fall a couple of times a week.

~~

Speaking of adoption, I came across this article tonight. Parts of the article bother me. – scratch that. The article bugs the shit out of me. I don’t care for the tone. It’s also the  in-your-face attitude of her having money to throw around (see: references to oysters, the cavalier “What price family?”/adopt at all costs attitude, etc.) which is completely irrelevant to the adoption scenario and the point she might be trying to make, and the fact that Rosa (can I call her Rosa?) lays out blatant misinformation in an article that is published for all the English speaking world to read.

She lays out her failed placement out as if that awful scamming scenario is rampant – oh, it’s definitely out there (sadly), but not all facilitators are lazy, complacent dumbshits who don’t do their homework and screw their clients over. The other issue is where does the blame lay here – the facilitator for being suckered, or Rosa for her implied desperation in blindly overnighting a check? Only further down does she say they “learned a facilitator is not a licensed adoption agency.” Whoops. Someone who worked so hard to give the impression she’s sophisticated and is even world traveled admitted she and her husband didn’t do her homework. That was an expensive mistake, eh, Rosa?

I think what bothers me most is that Rosa does not give a positive public image for potential adoptive parents – in fact, I think she comes across as the stereotype of the desperate infertile woman in the tone and verbiage… the exact type of person the anti-adoption faction complains about, and rightfully so.

She also gives a bad rap to any mother giving up her child – she devotes many lines to the crazy scammer, but nary a word of the woman who gave her the gift of Nina, other than stroking the mother’s hair during labor. She devoted not one single word of public gratitude.

The article is has the words ‘truth and lies’ in its headline, but I see not a lot of truth and several… well, if not lies, then misleading and uninformed statements.

According to Rosa: 1) Adoption is a long, harsh road. 2) It is also expensive. 3) The process to become certified is invasive and annoying. 4) It’s normal to just blindly send off a check for someone for two months’ rent and expenses. 5) Birth mothers are crazy and demanding. 6) There is no reparation for scam situations. 7) Adoption is an industry – possibly a evil, bad one. 8) All adoptive parents have a “heart rending, mind-bending story to tell.” 9) The world is defined by California law. 10) Legal proceedings are unofficial.

According to me:

1) Agree, it can be; I don’t think anyone would ever describe it as a cakewalk.

2) Not always, but you will get burned if you don’t do your homework… and yes, placements can fall through, sometimes causing the potential adoptive parents to forfeit a lot of money. And by the way, Rosa, private domestic adoption does NOT necessarily run $30-50K – in reality, private adoptions are generally much ‘cheaper’ (in quotes because adoption isn’t cheap in the least) than agencies.

3) Most who have been through it would agree; we were lucky that we had a classy case worker who did her best to keep it from being obnoxious as she could.

4) Not only no but hell no. This action reeked of desperation and bad judgment.

5) No, not all. I’d even venture to say it’s likely the opposite.

6) A comment following the article dispels this assertion, but it has to be done in a timely manner.

7) If you’re going through an agency, I’d likely agree with you, which is why I heartily support private adoptions. Agencies can be a monstrous ripoff.

8) While we did have a borderline-traumatic placement with Boy, I’d say that for every one grueling placement, I’ve come across 8 to 10 that are so heartening that it restores my faith in mankind… and that’s saying a lot for an old cynic like me.

9) Huh. My state is smart – a facilitator as Rosa described cannot make a placement (they’re actually illegal here); a licensed agency, a social worker representing a licensed agency like ours, or an attorney has to.*  I’d certainly agree that facilitators are a potentially expensive pain in the ass, and God help you if you get a bad one.

10) I only came across this discrepancy/false assertion/lack of attention to detail the sixth time I re-read the article as I wrote this. The term I think she meant was ‘formality.’ Without the legal proceedings, you can’t have baby, not yours…  it’s OFFICIAL at that point. That’s a dangerous mistake to make in an article and in a world where people are already amazingly ignorant about adoption and its processes.

Rosa comes across as selfish, whiny, a little ignorant, entitled and snobby.  The constant descriptions of her expensive lifestyle was irrelevant to the story, taking away from whatever valid point she was trying to make.

The editors at MSN would do better to find a better writer for the face of adoption in their lifestyle page.

~~

I know that We Three will have a lovely time up here in snow land, and I hope all of you have a joyous celebration of the new year. Laterz!

_________________________________________

*NB: I used the term/title “facilitator” in Boy’s story for the person who ‘managed’ our placement, but she was not one in the sense described in the article. It was just the best term at the time to describe her services