Separating a child from its mother can be very painful. But nobody wants to talk about it.

[StevieM]

Article: "Her biological mother had been forced to give her up because she’d lost her job and home and couldn’t provide for her four children, but there was no evidence of abuse."

My thoughts: We couldn't find a way to avoid TPRing this woman? We had to have a permanent solution to a temporary problem?

Article: But even at a very young age, Samantha had a mean streak. When she was about 20 months old, living with foster parents in Texas, she clashed with a boy in day care. The caretaker soothed them both; problem solved. Later that day Samantha, who was already potty trained, walked over to where the boy was playing, pulled down her pants, and peed on him. “She knew exactly what she was doing,” Jen says. “There was an ability to wait until an opportune moment to exact her revenge on someone.”

My thoughts: Gee...you think that maybe she was yearning for her real mom?

There was not one comment in this whole article about the possible effect that being separated from her mother might have had on this child.

This is journalistic malpractice.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/06/when-your-child-is-a-psychopath/524502/

I am talking about the parts of the article that deal with child Samantha. I am not commenting on the rest of the article.

Apparently it never occurred to these adoptive parents that their daughter might benefit from reuniting with her natural mother. Maybe this girl could be helped by hearing her first mother tell her how much she always loved her.

[Wounded Bear]

1. Hurts the child, hurts the mother...

Repub wet dream.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

2. I'm not sure you can confidentally assume

her behavior is simply the result of being separated from her mother. Going over and peeing on another kid is pretty extreme, especially for such a young child. Somehow I doubt that being reunited with her mother will make a difference in that behavior. I mean, expressing how much you miss your mom by peeing on another kid? I fail to see a real connection there. That girl has lots and lots going on besides being apart from her mother.

[StevieM]

3. I disagree. That incident happened when she was very young and it makes perfect sense to me

that she was dealing with the effects of being separated from her mom and siblings.

And I adamantly believe that an open adoption would benefit her. Being granted access to her natural mother and her blood relatives could prove very beneficial to this child, as it has benefited many children.

Why can't she have the option? We know that the mother would almost certainly welcome it since the adoption happened for financial reasons, not a lack of desire to parent. Then again, most birth mothers would jump at the opportunity for an open adoption and a relationship with their children.

The adoptive parents should stop being so selfish and allow their two adopted children to reconnect with their biological family.

[LisaL]

4. You are making a lot of assumptions you have no way of knowing.

In addition, sounds like these children were adopted out of foster care, not directly from the bio mother. The adoptive parents might not even know who she is.

[StevieM]

6. If there was a TPR then they almost certainly know who she is.

She was still their legal mother, even when they were in foster care. Her name would be included in the adoption papers.

And the odds of any first mother not wanting contact with their biological children are low. Adoptive children generally do not come from mothers who simply were not interested in parenting. They usually come from mothers who were forced to give up their children due to being in dire financial circumstances and forced to accept a permanent solution to a temporary problem.

I firmly believe that adopted children benefit from contact with their blood relatives, and especially their natural mother.

And, yes, I believe in the concept of "the primal wound." I think the pain that many adoptees feel is legitimate, and if an adopted child is struggling then a reunion with their biological family should be strongly considered as a possible method of helping them heal.

[pnwmom]

11. Where are your links for that?

I know 3 adoptive children and -- for whatever reason -- none of the three mothers in these open adoptions has tried to have any contact. If they do, the adoptive parents will make sure it happens, because they want the best for the kids.

But you shouldn't assume that if children aren't having contact with the birth parents, it's the fault of the adoptive parents. Birth parents can have their own reasons for not wanting contact.

I had a 40 year old friend who was unhappy because she had found her birth mother -- and learned she had siblings -- but her birth mother wanted no contact. And the birth mother also wanted the adoptee to stay away from her siblings.

You are also overlooking the fact that sometimes there are husbands or partners involved who are the reason the birth mother wants no contact. That isn't the fault of the adoptive parent, and it's not a short term problem.

[Stonepounder]

8. I have to disagree with you Stevie.

Certainly being separated from her biological mother at an early age could be part of the problem, but if you read farther into the article, she was diagnosed as a psychopath. Her adoptive parents tried everything. And, at the age of 6, Samantha (not her real name) tried to murder her 2-year-old sister by strangling her.

Approx 135,000 children are adopted each year in the US. Very few become psychopaths.

[mopinko]

19. you have an old-timey idea about child development/mental health

where disfunction is blamed on mommy, either by commission or omission. echoes of old siggie freud.
it is rapidly being overturned by research into genetic and behavior/brain health.

to those of us who have raised children w mental health issues, it is both incredibly painful and unfair. children can and are born w twists in their brains. they may take years to play out and show themselves, but we KNOW there is a genetic component to mental illnesses. the tangle between nature and nurture is a tight knot, but nature has a lot more to do w it than was previously thought.


you also have a romantic notion of adoption and motherhood if you think every woman bonds w her offspring, and would do anything for them.
most do, but certainly not all. to say so is to reduce women to hormone addled mommy machines.

[StevieM]

20. You seem to have an old-fashioned idea about who the birth mother is in our society.

Women who lose children to adoption are not less loving or less maternal. Some of them have other children already. Many will go on to have more children. And others are so distraught that they develop secondary infertility.

In any event, this particular mother was raising four children and the article makes it clear that she lost them--or some of them--for financial reasons. She lost her job and her home and was forced to accept a permanent solution to a temporary problem.

[Adrahil]

5. Meh....

My sister was adopted. She is one of the kindest, most loving people you would ever meet. Sounds like anecdotal evidence that's pretty useless for making generalizations.

[StevieM]

7. I am not saying that adoptees cannot be kind and loving people.

I am saying that many adoptees feel pain that emanates from the separation and that feeling of loss should not be delegitimized. And if a child is struggling to this extent then reaching out to her natural mother is a worthwhile endeavor. Developing that connection could help with other connections that are not working properly.

As for your sister, I am glad that things went so well for her. I am curious as to how things went for her biological mother. Did they ever reunite? Do they have any contact?

[MichMary]

15. This child isn't just "struggling"

She is dangerous. Psychopathy sometimes just happens. It can happen in functional families to biological children.

I won't disagree with you about the impact that adoption can have, but I think this girl is not a typical example.

[Adrahil]

21. I presonally think...

A loving, permanent home is probably most important. Kids can't detect genetics.

After our parents died, my sister did express a desire to track down her biological family. She said she had no interest prior to then.

She contacted me prior to doing it because she didn't want me to feel slighted (I'm not in the least) and I gave her a genetic test for her birthday. Through that test, she tracked down many cousins. And some siblings. Her biological parents died quite a while ago.... in bad circumstances (drugs, alcohol). Her siblings live in Florida, amd she's visited them once. She is fairly close now with a biological first cousin that lives relatively close by. I've met the cousin. Nice lady.

[no_hypocrisy]

9. I am a child protection defense attorney.

About six years ago, I took on a pro bono (no fee) case where Child Protection took away my client's five children (ages 3 to 8) without a valid court order, across state lines. And CP conducted a ruthless campaign in court for almost four years to terminate my client's parental rights and have the foster parents adopt her children.

On top of that, my client was the victim of domestic violence (which brought her existence to the attention of CP). Instead of seeking treatment and protection for my client, CP found reasons why she was neglecting her children (poverty) and denying them education (poverty). CP found a judge who acted "in the best interests of the children" and we lost Round One.

But we also found an expert in domestic violence and a secret domestic violence guidelines that CP was supposed to follow and one of the first things they DIDN'T DO was to keep mother and children united. Instead CP separated the children from our client, gave them to a foster family who declared their intention to adopt within a month of getting the kids.

We also found out that if foster children are adopted, the caseworker for CP gets $8,000 per child as a bonus for effecting the termination of parental rights and adoption. This C/W was looking at $40,000. Why would he want reunification?

Epilogue: We finally won. We had a new judge who surprised us by literally giving us the kids back in court. CP never appealed. The kids are now resettled in a new state. Our client divorced her abusive husband. The kids are now 10 to 17, in school, and doing well with their mother and grandmother.

[uponit7771]

10. Amen!!!

[StevieM]

13. Congratulations on the wonderful job you did!! It is so nice to hear a story with a happy ending.

There is so much CPS abuse in this country.

Kudos to that judge as well.

I am so glad that the kids are where they belong, with their mom.

[MichMary]

12. You are omitting some relevant info

I read the article a week or so ago, and this child's behavior is chilling. She tried to strangle her very young adoptive brother, while their mother was driving. Imagine if she hadn't been able to immediately pull over. Could have been a tragedy. She admitted that she wanted to kill all of them.

She will probably be diagnosed as a psychopath someday. That doesn't have a lot to do with missing her bio mom.

[StevieM]

14. I disagree. I think she suffered a "primal wound," as it is called. Reuniting her with her mother

could help to heal her.

And the bio mom is not missing--she is being denied access to her children by a cold-blooded society.

[MichMary]

16. This isn't just a "primal wound"

and I don't think society is as "cold-blooded" as Samantha. From the article:

Starting at age 6, Samantha began drawing pictures of murder weapons: a knife, a bow and arrow, chemicals for poisoning, a plastic bag for suffocating. She tells me that she pretended to kill her stuffed animals.

“You were practicing on your stuffed animals?,” I ask her.

She nods.

“How did you feel when you were doing that to your stuffed animals?”

“Happy.”

“Why did it make you feel happy?”

“Because I thought that someday I was going to end up doing it on somebody.”

[MichMary]

17. The same family adopted the older half-sister

who (apparently) hasn't attempted to murder anyone. Why the difference?

If Samantha were reunited with her bio-mom at this point, do you think everything would be better? Do you think the bio-mom would have the resources, financial and emotional, to deal with Samantha's problems?

My d-i-l was adopted, and is a very successful professional, and a wonderful mom. She has a very close relationship with her adoptive parents.

Another friend has an adoptive grandson who has a lot of the problems Samantha exhibits. They feel the problem is that they didn't get him away from his neglectful bio mom soon enough.

Sometimes there is no simple explanation.

[StevieM]

18. Different people process things in different ways.

Maybe they have different personality types that led them to process the trauma in different ways.

Also, the older sister might have at least been old enough to understand points that her mother was trying to communicate to her. So maybe she left the family having been told--and having understood--that her mother loves her. Also, maybe during her years in foster care she was allowed some contact with her family, while her younger sister was perhaps denied that.

I think you are misunderstanding the word "reunion." It doesn't mean re-adoption. It means an open adoption. And, yes, I think the mother would have the "emotional resources" to have a relationship with her own child. Besides, the article says that the girl is in Texas, which is where her mother was from. Why can they not arrange for them to meet? That answer, IMO, is that they know that the mother will then want contact with the other daughter as well.

And in this case I actually do think that the child should be re-adopted by her mother, who I am willing to bet would jump at the opportunity.

I am glad your DIL is so successful and has a good relationship with her parents. Maybe her first mother would like to know her too.

I hope your friend's grandson is allowed a relationship with his biological mother. It could prove very beneficial to him, even if there really were neglect issues at one point.

[LisaL]

22. Per the article, it is possible that condition is hereditary and hard-wired into brain.

You are assuming that if she wasn't separated from the mother, she would have been normal.Which might not be the case at all.
It's also is not a given that if she was re-united with the mother, that would improve her behavior.

[StevieM]

23. Then why not arrange a reunion and see what happens? Why not see what benefits it could offer?

What is the harm in allowing her to meet someone who almost certainly loves her and misses her? Maybe hearing how much she means to her first mother would help develop her ability to feel love and empathy?

I suspect that this is not something the adoptive parents would ever allow, for either of the daughters. The language they used was "we felt called" and "you were ours." I suppose the latter could be construed as typical adoptive language, although certainly not admirable, since it dismisses the relevance of the child's first family. But the former is decidedly Mormon. And they are from Idaho. LDS adoption values tend to call for a closed adoption and no future reunion.

And, yes, I am assuming that she suffered a primal wound. I cannot say for certain what it's full impact was. But my point in posting this article was how absurd it was to simply ignore that potential impact altogether. How can we live in a society that casually glosses over her separation from the mother who loved her when talking about what went wrong in her development?

[MichMary]

24. Sometimes meeting the birth mother isn't a good thing

I know this is anecdotal, but . . .

A relative's son-in-law was adopted at birth. There were some hereditary psych disorders that began to manifest well into adulthood, after marriage and with three children. One day, bio-mom showed up on their doorstep, with a ton of emotional/mental/psychiatric baggage. It began a downward spiral that caused the marriage to break up, and had a bad impact on the children. Hard to say what would have happened if she had kept her distance, but in this case, reunion was obviously not a good thing.

I also think you are unfairly casting aspersions on the adoptive family. You don't know that the family would not allow a meeting. It could be that the birth mother isn't available; she may have died, or moved and can't be found. It may even be that she doesn't want contact. It may be her conviction that a clean break was in the best interests of both of them.

"We felt called" is a way of saying there was some divine intervention, which could very well make a child feel very special, since Samantha has obviously been raised with whatever religious beliefs the family holds. The same with "you were ours." As I said, I read the article, and IIRC, this was in the context of Samantha asking why they continue to love her. The mother's reply shows their commitment AS HER PARENTS to helping her through these issues.

You do seem to have some very specific issues with adoption and with adoptive parents. Whatever your experience, it isn't the same for everybody, and there is no need to impute motivations that may very well not exist.

[StevieM]

25. Anyone of us could have died at some previous point, but statistically we are all more likely to be

alive. Chances are the mother is still living, probably with some of her other children.

Talking about "a clean break" is not typical birth parent language. The notion that this woman lost her children, for financial reasons, and decided to accept that and move on with her life is hard to imagine. Most mothers don't just move on without their lost children.

It is usually the adoptive parents who want "a clean break." After the adoption papers are signed, of course. Beforehand we get a lot of flowery talk about open adoptions. To be fair, this was a different kind of adoption, one that did not take place at birth. So it was horrifying in a different way.

If the adoptive parents "felt called" to intervene, maybe they could have offered to take the children in while the mother got back on her feet. I am sorry that they did not feel called to help with family preservation. Instead they felt called to make sure that a mother who apparently got pregnant through pre-marital sex was not allowed to continue parenting.

I am not just condemning the adoptive parents, I am condemning the whole of our society.

[Chemisse]

31. I agree that being taken from your parent can be devastating and life-altering.

And that there are some agencies in which this is done too readily.

But I don't agree that you can take a case like this - or any single case - and blame it on losing the mother. There are too many unknown variables to make that assumption.

[B2G]

26. Has it occured to you that the birth mother

may have problems of her own? These types of things can be hereditary, which the article you posted clearly states.

You are assigning motives all around, something about which you have no idea at all.

And I really don't appreciate your attempt to stigmatize adoptees as broken people.

[StevieM]

27. I think being separated from her children is probably the birth mother's biggest problem in life.

The other daughter is not said to have these problems, so maybe it is not all hereditary.

Besides, the mother lost her children due to financial reasons. She lost her job and her home and was forced to accept a permanent solution to a temporary problem. That was also part of my OP.

I am not saying that all adoptees are broken people. I am saying that this child is broken and it is crazy IMO that nobody seems to be thinking about what benefits it might provide for her to meet her natural mother and be told how much she loves her and that she never wanted them to be separated.

[Freddie]

28. Ted Bundy was a classic sociopath

Born to a single mother in the 1940's, she defied the norms of the day and refused to give him up for adoption. As a small child they lived with her parents and later moved to Washington state, where she married a (by all accounts) nice man who was good to Ted. He was never separated from his mother and went on to murder at least 36 women with no remorse. His mother had 4 more children with her husband, all of whom grew up to be good citizens.
There are people who are born with no conscience.

[StevieM]

29. And there are other serial killers, like David Berkowitz, who were adopted.

And in his case, issues stemming from the adoption have been strongly suggested to have played a role in his problems.

In any event, I wasn't saying that being adopted turns you into a psychopath. I was saying that this girl has issues that might be helped by a reunion with her natural mother. And it is crazy that nobody is even talking about it as a possible advantage in trying to facilitate her recovery.

It seems like the only reason we even know that her adoption took place due to a financial crisis is because the writers of the article had to make it clear that there was no abuse prior to the separation so that they could discuss the environmental versus genetic factors that led to her problems.

[janterry]

30. I was actually pretty offended by the Atlantic article

It stated many things as fact, that most certainly are not fact. We have no idea if personality disorders are 'nature' or 'nurture.' We can't even agree to a diagnosis (I might not have given this child psychopath, for instance - in fact, I can assure you I would not). Take that kid to 10 clinicians and you might very well get 10 different dx.

I also agree that parents and children should be kept together as much as possible. There are times when children do need to be TPR'd, but it should be infrequent and only after appropriate supports are put into (into!) the home. Too often, we put in services that are short term, don't address the core issues, and fail to offer parents any kind of substantive relief (how about respite??). There are flexible models for in home interventions - but to work they need to be creative and address core issues. Or just give them an apartment. Simple - here it is. (Costs less than removal.........)

I could go on and on............we just treat kids according to the 'service menu' (parenting classes, outpatient therapy, some in home services - short term, medication, hospitalization, lock-up).