Saturday, December 15, 2007

A Little Night Reading

Lately I've been doing some reading as a good friend and Sister-In-Arms shares her research library with me. An NCFA publication came across my screen this week. It is a booklet called "_____MOTHER, GOOD MOTHER, Her Story of Heroic Redemption" published in 2007 by the Family Research Council and the National Council for Adoption and authored by Charles T. Kenny, Ph.D. Page 3 of the booklet has one the most remarkable statements I have read in quite some time. (NB: The B word has been removed from this quote.)

From Page 3 of the booklet:

"Some of the _____mothers who placed their children fifteen or more years before the interviews took place felt extreme pressure and even coercion to do so. Their bitter feelings about their experiences set the stage for understanding the profound importance of involving _____mothers in the process of selecting loving families for their children. Many _____mothers who felt coerced or tricked into placing their children for adoption were not at peace with the adoption. The resentment one _____mother expressed regarding feeling forced into adoption was typical of those who had felt coercion: ‘Coercion, lies, and deceit... That worked on me... The mother-child bond is really strong. I think that’s more important than having two parents. My baby was denied breast milk, knowing his grandparents. I was denied watching him grow and have a life together. Fear is what makes people sign relinquishing papers, fear that it (keeping the baby) will make their life worse than better. (_____ mothers’) fear is taken advantage of... It is deceitful. It (coercive adoption) is not really concerned with the best interest of the mom and baby... It’s concerned with receiving healthy, white babies for people’."

"This _____mother felt that no one was really concerned about her and her child. She felt judged, refer to adoption as an "industry," rather than considering it a social service in the best interests of children. Because she felt forced into adoption, she did not feel the decision was her own and was bitter about her adoption placement. The _____mothers who felt this way were older,generally having placed their children more than 25 years earlier, when the stigma against single-parenting was far greater than it is today. Then, as the _____mothers described, it was also more common for social workers and nurses to pressure women into adoption. Women should never feel forced into adoption, and when they are, the system has failed them."

"Thankfully, such occurrences have become quite rare. The younger _____mothers felt they had made their decisions voluntarily, and as a result, they "owned" their decisions. As they struggled through the process of making decisions, they successfully resisted being pressured by others. One ______mother said: ‘It was eye opening... You need to control yourself, how to handle people and situations. Look, I made, or we made this decision. I’m giving myself back the power. I did something I’m not happy or proud about (getting pregnant), but it’s me that has the power. I’m in control. Nobody was telling me to do XYZ. They are just throwing out suggestions... When you are in control, you know I’m going to do A, then B, then C... Look at me. Yes, this is what happened. Look what I did. Look where I am now’."

Do my eyes deceive me? The NCFA is saying BSE moms were coerced!

Barb, for BSERI

16 comments:

Anonymous said...

there is no such thing as a baby scoop era, its just another poor excuse for mothers to blame there lack of compassion to there children they chose to give away. Every decade is the same but do we here about that, no...all we here is about the mothers and the 60s baby scoop. Personaly i feel that the "swinging 60s" is no more to blame than the decedant 90s , its just down to the stupidity of the mothers for falling pregnant in the first place . Its about time the mothers (if you can actualy call these mothers) stop blaming everything for something they did . Its discusting to think that in some cases there are women that are still blaming coerson and social workers for there mistakes. Face up to the truth, you all messed up at the expence of the children . No one ever thinks the children has suffered more than the mothers. We adopted wernt asked to be born or concieved, we adopted dont moan as much , we deal with it and move on, i suggest you mothers do the same .

Anonymous said...

yet again another bigoted false view of adoption by a bunch of clowns , get over it because life goes on.All the storys and lies you mothers spread is criminal. Im glad you all lost children because none of you deserve to have children, irresponcable behaviour,liars,fantasists and thats just the start.
Adoptive parents will always have whaT you dont, love care and compassion. I hang my head in discust at all mothers for the lies they tell, all this wasted time on blogs and forums is pointless, your not achieving a thing apart from hiding behind all your lies. When you all enter the gates of heaven may you all rot in hell.

Anonymous said...

It certainly looks like they are saying that,Barb. Of course we have known this for years and years.

Seems like it isn't to smart of them to print this but again they need to tell the public that there were coercions in the past. Like there aren't any coercions now.

We mothers must be making them squirm as they never seemed to care about the coercions before what would make them write about something that happened so long ago. They need to justify but there is NO justification for we mothers who lost our babies, NONE.

gale

....for BSERI said...

I think they have been waiting for us to grow old and begin to die off before they admitted to anything, Gale.

Thirty nine years have passed since they tied me to a delivery table and pulled my baby out of me with forceps. The anniversary was yesterday, in fact.

I personally don't think adoption will be around in forty years but if it is, they will publish a booklet that says something to the effect that yes, we marketed adoption to youngsters way back in the 90's and Naughties, but we don't do that anymore.

Barb

Anonymous said...

good im glad you suffered, you dont deserve any sympathy, birth mother = breeding machines for unwanted children.Not a single day goes by we hear the lies spewed out by mothers that they were drugged or coersed again all lies.

....for BSERI said...

If you read the entire quote, Anonymous, you will see that the NCFA is admiting there was coercion during the BSE.

Couple of other quotes for you, some from historians, some from ethicists and some from social wreckers active during the BSE:


ETHICS IN AMERICAN ADOPTION, L. Anne Babb, 1999

"Caucasian and African-American single mothers were treated differently under the law in the pre-Roe v. Wade era following World War II, a fact documented by historian Rickie Solinger: [Black unwed mothers] were viewed as socially unproductive breeders, constrainable only by punitive, legal sanctions. Proponents of school segregation, restrictive public housing, exclusionary welfare policies, and enforced sterilization or birth control all used the issue of relatively high rates of Black illegitimacy to support their campaigns. White unwed mothers in contrast were viewed as socially productive breeders whose babies, unfortunately conceived out of wedlock, could offer infertile couples their only chance to construct proper families.

THE GIRL NOBODY LOVED: PSYCHOLOGICAL EXPLANATIONS FOR WHITE SINGLE PREGNANCY IN THE PRE-ROE V. WADE ERA, 1945-1965, Rickie Solinger (1990), Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies, Vol. 11, No. 2/3, Spirituality, Values, and Ethics. (1990)
"For white girls and women illegitimately pregnant in the pro-Roe era, the main chance for attaining home and marriage - a normative life - rested on the aspect of their rehabilitation that required relinquishment of the bastard child. More than 80 percent of white unwed mothers in maternity homes came to this decision in the immediate pre-Roe v. Wade era, acting in effect as breeders for white, adoptive parents for whom they supplied up to neatly 90 percent of all non-
relative infants by the mid-1960s. While motherhood as a state-of-being was apotheosized by the culture at large in the postwar years, only ‘good’ and properly married mothers were inviolate. For the others, "mother" was an honorific that could be bestowed or denied by the judgments of professionals. Unwed mothers were defined by psychological theory as not-mothers."

SOCIAL WORK AND SOCIAL PROBLEMS, "Unmarried Mothers," Helen Harris Perlman, National Association of Social Workers, 1964
"Because there are many more married couples wanting to adopt newborn white babies than out of wedlock babies are a social problem. (Sometimes social workers in adoption agencies have facetiously suggested setting up social provisions for more "baby breeding".)


IS MONEY OUR TROUBLE?" Paper presented at the National Conference of Social Workers, Cleveland (1953) Leontine Young
"... the tendency growing out of the demand for babies is to regard unmarried mothers as breeding machines...(by people intent) upon securing babies for quick adoptions."




COUNSELING THE UNWED MOTHERS, Helen E. Terkelsen, 1964

". . . unwed mothers may have placed their children for adoption for any of the following reasons . . . (2) they were advised or pressured to release the baby . . ."
OUT OF WEDLOCK, Leontine Young, 1954

AND SIN NO MORE: SOCIAL POLICY AND UNWED MOTHERS IN CLEVELAND 1855 TO 1990, Marian J. Morton, Historian, 1993
"The Crittenton caseworker's careful records reveal how the agency, which had originally gone to great lengths and expense to compel a woman to keep her child, now applied great psychological pressure upon a mother to place her child for adoption."




FALLEN WOMEN PROBLEM GIRLS: UNMARRIED MOTHERS AND THE PROFESSIONALIZATION OF SOCIAL WORK, 1890 - 1945, Regina G. Kunzel, professor and historian (1993)

". . . although the National Florence Crittenton Mission managed to maintain its policy of keeping mother and child together in the face of enormous pressure from social workers . . . By the 1940's, supported by the commitment of social workers to adoption, most homes were routinely arranging for the adoption of babies."

"Although social workers professed a belief in the fundamental right of unmarried mothers to make their own decision, in practice, they often pressured them to place their babies for adoption."

UNMARRIED MOTHERS, Clark Vincent, 1964
"If the demand for adoptable babies continues to exceed the supply ... then it is quite possible that, in the near future, unwed mothers will be "punished" by having their children taken from them right after birth. A policy like this would not be executed - nor labeled explicitly as "punishment". Rather, it would be implemented by such pressures and labels as: scientific findings, the best interest of the child, rehabilitation of the unwed mother, and the stability of family and society."

Anonymous said...

these are only words, no one has actual proof this went on. No one has any proof they were drugged, strapped down,babys torn from there bodys, not one single shred of proof, only words.Not a single mother has any documented proof that they were coersed, not one single mother has any evidence that they were drugged out there mind, of course you were drugged, nubane and gas and air or epidural, not one can show any written evidence that they were "tortured" because thats how it comes accross, its all lies.

Prove to all adopted these things happend and the void will be filled but thats impossable as everything that is portrayed is just an excuse for the mothers. How can a father be blamed,he didnt freely hand over a child, the mother did, and like ive said, prove otherwise with genuine articles, not just words from your lieing minds because your statement of in 40 years there wont be adoption, there will always be adoption whilst there are weak willed mothers out there. Being a parent myself regardless of my situation i would physicaly put a gun to anyones heads who threatend the well being of my child, ive yet to hear of one who would go to such lengths to protect there child, its all, "i was drugged, baby scoop era, i was tied down, i was coersed".. Weak willed and extreme lies.
Please attempt to prove me otherwise.

Anonymous said...

Ring a bell anyone he is still around waiting to spew
hate because his mother didn't respond to his threats.

yts..

typical responce for a foul mothed mother who knows nothing about GOMERS own mother or situation!!!!!!!!!!!


Recommend Message 14 of 15 in Discussion

From: BethVA62 Sent: 17/12/2007 19:55
ohhhh gee wiz gomer
get a grip
on something other than a bottle.


havnt touched a drop in a long time, i have no need to ,i speak in clarity and reality not dreams ...!!!!!!!!!!!



There are laws against it. The man or woman who posted there is a Coward... hiding behind "anonymous." Too spineless to post his or her REAL name but calling us liars and worse.


scared of what, a bunch of "crazy yanks " yea right, the laughing stock of the world, i dont think so...you know who i am and do you think i care 1 single iota about any of your idle name calling on adoptese, do you think im humiliated , do you honestly think i care, not 1 single bit coz i know the truth and thats all that counts, you carry on living in your tiny little bubbles of guilt coz in 20 years time most of you wont be here, but ill still be bashing ALL mothers, inclueding my own for being weak and liers. now run back to your little joe and carry on slating me, i love a good laugh.!!!!!

....for BSERI said...

By the way you guys if anyone needs an outline of common obstetrical practice for ALL women, (not just us) before 1975 or so, you might want to refer to this document;

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:JTOK7h-_hjYJ:www.sciencebasedbirth.com/WebPublishing_05/Faith_Book_1_Ch_2_2005.pdf+leather+restraints+white+women+labor&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=16&gl=us


an excerpt:

The next stop for the newly admitted labor patient was to be put to bed in a closed unit that did not permit husbands or other family members to visit, no mater how long she might be in labor. The mother-to-be was immediately given a double dose of sleeping pills and after that she was NPO – no food or water until after the birth, no matter how long that might be. Next she was injected with a huge dose of narcotics (100 mgm of Demerol) mixed with a psychotropic drug (20 mgms Lorfam, Visteril or Valium) and the amnesia and hallucinogenic drug scopolamine (1/150 grains), to be repeated every 2 to 3 hours during labor (no matter how many times), until the baby was born, even if it took a couple of days (or longer). These women were so “knocked out” that they drooled and talked in nonsense syllables.


With every uterine contractions they rose up out of the bed, made low moaning sounds or shrieked in pain and ask over and over again “what’s happening to me, what wrong with me?” as the amnesic drug made them forget they were in labor. We repeatedly told them they we OK, they were just in labor and it would soon be all over but they didn’t remember the explanation either. This went on for hours on end. Under the influence of these powerful hallucinogenic drugs somewomen became temporarily psychotic and physically fought with the staff. They bit nurses or doctors, fell out of bed, chipped teeth or broke an arm. To prevent falls (and lawsuits) a nurse was obligated to stand or sit right by the bed, no further than an arm’s length away. If the unit was too busy to spare a nurse for one-on-one custodial care, then these women were put under four-point restraint – heavy leather wrist and ankle cuffs designed for use in psychiatric hospitals. These were clamped to both arms and legs and then buckled to the four corners of the bed, holding the mother spread eagle on her back.

The use of four-point restraints was considered fortunate by the doctors because they believed that since labor hurt more when women were on their back (this was obvious to all observers), that uterine contractions must be more efficient and effective when the mother was on her back. Doctors often ordered the nurse to keep a labor patient on her back as a strategy for accelerating labor in an era before the use of Pitocin was common. The other ‘advantage’ of wrist restraints was that it kept these heavily medicated women from touching themselves “you know, down there”. One of the effects of the amnesic drug scopolamine was to produce the pharmaceutical equivalent of a lobotomy – that is, to liberate the mother from all her normal inhibitions. The observed behavior of thousands of heavily medicated women in active labor by hundreds of L&D nurses is that the ‘natural’ inclination of these women was to respond to the pain of uterine contraction and especially the pressure of the baby coming down the birth canal by making masturbatory movements. Of course, this direct association between childbirth and raw sex was something the staff found shocking and was spoken about by nurses only in disgusting tones. This personal revolution seemed to renew the efforts of many of the staff to keep such women in wrist restraints for the balance of their labor. It was seem as an all purpose solution -- prevented women from falling out of bed, forced them to labor in the most non-physiological posture possible (with the exception of being held aloft by their heels!) and also made it impossible to put a hand on their own genitals. When the birth became imminent, the labor patient was taken to the delivery room on a stretcher and dragged or pushed by two or three nurses over to the delivery table. Still under the influence of psychotropic and hallucinogenic drugs, the mother's arms were immediately tied down in big leather wrist restraints on each side of the delivery table. The rationale for this was both to prevent her from falling off the narrow table and also to keep her from touching her crotch or any of the sterile drapes or instruments used during the “surgical procedure” of a vaginal delivery. Her legs were then placed in obstetrical stirrups and secured with leather straps that buckled over the thigh and calf of each leg. At this point the table was “broken” – that is, the bottom half was removed so that her crotch was now at the bottom edge of the fore-shortened table. Next one of the nurses would stand between the mother’s wide spread legs and pull her hips down until her buttocks were literally hanging off the table over thin air.

Gomer's teacher said...

Hmmmm,

a person that misspells and knows a lot about drugs..ring any bells ladies.

It does for me sad part about it he at times got my sympathy. BUT no more sympathy from me.

Now I see why Joe doesn't let you post at adoptese. You need to seek HELP and I do know about your mother straight from your mouth.

You are fooling none of the BSE moms WE all know who you are. YOU and your angry and ugly mouth. Thankfully, your mother had sense to protect herself and I applaud her for that as you really need to get a check.

G you know a lot about drugs, any experience with them. lol. Also, are you a male nurse..or trained for one bet you couldn't keep a job in nursing as you are a angry person. Get a life your mother has and it doesn't include you.

gale

ps maybe he could understand a visual more than reading what the wreckers said during the BSE.

Gypsy, got time to post the charts..I will look if you don't and try to post them. Seems the know it all adoptee needs some more education and it isn't by reading.

Gypsy said...

Yep, Would appear the anonymous adoptee poster is a 'hater'! Not only a 'hater', but quite frankly quite ignorant as well. If this clueless person knew anything about anything.. he/she would know some of us Mothers..actually have acquired our hospital medical records detailing clinic visits, admission, specific drugs used during labor, delivery and post-partum.
I agree with you Gale...would appear our 'hater' is the 'hater' from elsewhere. I would advise the 'hater' to get over 'himself' and his 'hate'.
Lord... how infantile can one get with the overused rhetoric. "We adopted wernt asked to be born or conceived" No child was 'asked' to be born or conceived, adopted or non-adopted. Maybe we should suggest to all mothers-to-be, they should ask their 'fetus' if they would like to be born. Wonder how and what the 'fetus' would answer. Now the conceiving part is even more tricky..who do we ask? The egg or the sperm or both??? Do they have a language of their own that could impart their wish for no conception to take place?? How utterly childish/infantile of this hater poster to post such drivel!

Anonymous said...

You are fooling none of the BSE moms WE all know who you are. YOU and your angry and ugly mouth. Thankfully, your mother had sense to protect herself and I applaud her for that as you really need to get a check.

G you know a lot about drugs, any experience with them. lol. Also, are you a male nurse..or trained for one bet you couldn't keep a job in nursing as you are a angry person. Get a life your mother has and it doesn't include you.


oh Gale you no so little, im Sat in my mothers house you fool, im using her computor you fool, my mother has openly addmitted her mistakes and for that i hate what she did , but i love her, my mothers anger manifested itself in other directions ,and if you listened it was her who ended the reunion years back but today we talk, we disscuss and more than ever we understand each other ...As for my employment perhaps you would like to pop on a plane,fly over and ask my patients if im angry with them, i think i would like to see you face when you see that im only angry at one thing , AMERICANS , not all might i add but the bunch of psycophants that have been brain washed by it all, the ones who year in year out speak the same drivel and dont move on, in fact apart from a couple i think AMERICANS are the most stupid race on this planet, i dont hate everything, nor would i confess to know everything but what i do know is you all talk the talk but none of you walk the walk, i hate you all but thats my choise, my choise remember, i think that none of you grasp how meaniless all your campaigns are, how much of a waste of time and effort when in fact you could be building bridges with your loved ones or getting on with your life.

If you want i will happily leave my mothers telephone number on here and you can ask her yourself you know, mother to mother and if you do speak to my mother perhaps then you will see further than the end of your big ugly nose...

So whats it going to be , phone numbers so you can check me out, employment numbers to check im working, please do enlighten me because im realy dying to see you AMERICAN fools with a big ugly egg on your face, i have nothing to hide at all...my mothers name is Wendy ann shes 62 years of age and is the most huggable lovable women ive met now we have sorted out our difference, reunions take a long time and unlike most of you fools ive stuck it out, hurted and hated but you know what LOVE CONQUERS ALL ...

Now why dont you all crawl back under your rocks, lick your putrid wounds and die a very slow and painful death because the crap you all talk is stinking this blog out.

Not one of you has a grain of intelegance, you cant have, YOUR AMERICANS....

so come on brave ladys wanna talk to a REAL mother who dealt with her problems , naaaa i shouldnt think so coz you would all be ashamed once you hear a REAL mothers words, not some semi political rubbish....

Anonymous said...

and as a parting shot may i wish ALL you mothers without kids, a very very crap christmas and remember, your kids dont want to be found by you, they are very happy with there REAL parents, the ones who have bothered to care for them..

bye bye AMERICAN FOOLS hahahahahahahahahahahaha......

Anonymous said...

My Gosh, the man from across the pond of many faces/names has shown up on the Redbook forum? I was thinking he had retired to a room with a shawl, muttering to himself while he drank his Irish moonshine. Heh heh...I might have to go a poke a stick at the wounded beast. Naw, that would be cruel and, as Joe pointed out, he is one seriously damaged dude. Robin BSEMom and, formerly, "Mommie Robin"


is it any wonder half you sad creatures never have a successful reunion with such comments, seriously damaged by what , the exact same as you fools , only i dont buy into healing and im showing my anger at the very people i concider to be in the wrong here. AMERICANS...

from day one of joining Adoptese ive wittnessed time and time again the mothers turning on an adoptee and that adoptee leaving because of the bitchy comments, time after time ive stood up for all, adoptees and moms but suddenly the light was switched on and ive seen you all for who you realy are, a bunch of bitter and twisted mainly old women who are bitter at what they have done and they attack all adoptees who dont agree with them. Time after time ive blasted and been blasted but the difference between me and any other adoptee is ill fight on till i have no life to fight with, ill go on and on because i wont stand down or be slightly scared or worried about a bunch of spitful women .

Also the other reason ill keep comming back is every time i read or see the witches of USA gang up on anyone i will react, why should you have it your own way , Adoptese used to be a great sight but now its full of wrinkly old mothers who just want the domain for themselfs and god help any adoptee who speaks out there...There either accused of being a troll, a s/w or will be blatanly trampled on by you so called BIRTH mothers.If any one needs to hang there head in shame its you lot, youve bullied and COERSED others to believe your words are true. You have become exactly the words you waste your time on , COERSER'S ...

And the worst of the lot is the AMERICANS..

Anonymous said...

our G guy is a perfect example of the damage adoption does to us.
He's angry and has every damn right to be.
He obviously has trouble managing it.

I won't throw G away for it, but I won't pay any attention to mean, ugly and nasty anger directed at others; all in hope of making his own pain feel better.
That's not fair at all G.
If you disagree with someone, that's fine, just say so.

Pain has a way of making one loose control of good sense.
Most of us (adoptees) at one point or another do have problems expressing our selves through anger, it's why so many of us have been deloused and bailed out.

It's why so many of us come here for help.
It's why so many of us don't return here or get tossed out of here.
Anger can be very dangerous and damaging to all it's directed towards, and often bystanders as well.

G,
I hope you feel better today, you are an incredibly sensitive person. I hope your pain and anguish diminishes soon. Hurting others in an attempt to heal yourself will not do a bit of good for you. It's no good for anyone, and no help for anyone, especially you. Screw everybody else - It will destroy you Graham.

Pssst G,
"American" is not a race.
America is a country - filled with citizens of many races.
A great colorful diverse community.
If you hate us, you hate your own kind too.

The world is my country.
To do good is my religion.
Peace and good will towards all,


Thank you Beth, thank you very much , christmas has triggered me and although im with my mother this year my anger is fully out of control, its no excuse i know but thank you Beth .

I'll leave you all alone now, i wont attempt to say sorry because i know you wont believe me ...

bye.

....for BSERI said...

I am going to be moderating comments for the sole purpose of filtering out the hate spam. But, I am also going to leave his hateful comments up. The next time someone characterizes adoption as a loving option, you can refer them here.


Barb