About Adoptee Rage

Statistics Identify large populations of Adoptees in prisons, mental hospitals and committed suicide.
Fifty years of scientific studies on child adoption resulting in psychological harm to the child and
poor outcomes for a child's future.
Medical and psychological attempts to heal the broken bonds of adoption, promote reunions of biological parents and adult children. The other half of attempting to repair a severed Identity is counselling therapy to rebuild the self.

Wednesday, May 25, 2016

Maternal Deprivation that All Adopted Infants Suffer

ADOPTEE RAGE!

Maternal Deprivation Affect on Adopted Infants
__________________________________________________

Adopted infants suffer the traumatic event of maternal separation, are denied the continuation of their biological relationship bond with there biological mother, that is hormone driven-reciprocated between genetic mother-offspring dyad,
and are forced by adoptive parents to deny their traumatic experience, consequences and future healing. 

The adoptive parent's intentional denial of the adopted infant's biological separation trauma is a predictable response from the adoptive parent's "cognitive dissonance". The psychological defense mechanism cognitive dissonance plays a great role in adoptive parent's avoidance of shame, denial of who the child was, is, who the child's mother is and how they separated the pair to fulfill their own selfish needs, wants and demands. 

Their denial of the impact and consequences that the adoptive parents directly caused the suffering of the nameless mother and her offspring to satisfy the adoptive parent's desires to parent a biological mother's offspring. The common sense, laws of nature and morality, is that the child will always belong with the child's biological family, and will return after the adoption ends at age of majority, 18 years of age adulthood.  

If the adoptive parent were to honestly acknowledge any psychological harm to the adopted child and the adopted child's biological mother, the adoptive parent would experience excessive guilt, moral sadness and selfish based shame in their selfish demands to intentionally separate a child from it's biological mother, to fill the empty void in their own life.  
that the adopted child experienced  trauma ever existed. 

The traumatised child will suffer maternal depravity, as their biological mother is the only person biologically and hormonally driven to nurture their offspring by intuition, biological similarity and genetic mirroring. The adoptive mother is not driven by pregnancy and postpartum hormones, she can not intuitively understand or communicate in the biological mother-infant chemical language, and can not provide genetic mirroring to non-genetic offspring. 

The adoptive mother relationship is based on the interpersonal relationship theory of likeness, where the adopted infant is expected to act similar to the adoptive family, disregarding their own spontaneous personality and true self. While this "adopted child role" works well in young childhood, the charade can not logically last forever. When the "adopted child role" begins to deteriorate in adolescence when the adopted child is attempting to form an inauthentic adopted indentity that does not fit with reality. The young adult adopted child is attempting identity, yet is denying the truth of who the adopted child really is genetically the adoptee must make decisions based in truth and not in lies to accept himself authentically.

Bowlby's Attachment Theory

John Bowlby (1907 - 1990) was a psychoanalyst (like Freud) and believed that mental health and behavioral problems could be attributed to early childhood.
Bowlby’s evolutionary theory of attachment, that children come into the world biologically pre-programmed to form attachments with others, because this will help them to survive.
Bowlby was very much influenced by ethological theory in general, but especially by Lorenz's (1935) study of Imprinting.  Lorenz showed that attachment was innate (in young ducklings) and therefore has a survival value.
Bowlby believed that attachment behaviors are instinctive and will be activated by any conditions that seem to threaten the achievement of proximity, such as separation, insecurity and fear.
Bowlby (1969, 1988) also postulated that the fear of strangers represents an important survival mechanism, built in by nature.  Babies are born with the tendency to display certain innate behaviors (called social releasers) which help ensure proximity and contact with the mother or attachment figure (e.g. crying, smiling, crawling, etc.) – these are species-specific behaviors.
During the evolution of the human species, it would have been the babies who stayed close to their mothers that would have survived to have children of their own.  Bowlby hypothesized that both infants and mothers have evolved a biological need to stay in contact with each other.
These attachment behaviors initially function like fixed action patterns and all share the same function. The infant produces innate ‘social releaser’ behaviors such as crying and smiling that stimulate caregiving from adults.  The determinant of attachment is not food but care and responsiveness.

Bowlby suggested that a child would initially form only one attachment and that the attachment figure acted as a secure base for exploring the world.  The attachment relationship acts as a prototype for all future social relationships so disrupting it can have severe consequences.

Main Points of Bowlby’s Theory


1. A child has an innate (i.e. inborn) need to attach to one main attachment figure (i.e. monotropy).
Although Bowlby did not rule out the possibility of other attachment figures for a child, he did believe that there should be a primary bond which was much more important than any other (usually the mother).
Bowlby believes that this attachment is different in kind (qualitatively different) from any subsequent attachments.  Bowlby argues that the relationship with the mother is somehow different altogether from other relationships.
Essentially, Bowlby (1988) suggested that the nature of monotropy (attachment conceptualized as being a vital and close bond with just one attachment figure) meant that a failure to initiate, or a breakdown of, the maternal attachment would lead to serious negative consequences, possibly including affectionless psychopathy.  Bowlby’s theory of monotropy led to the formulation of his maternal deprivation hypothesis.
The child behaves in ways that elicits contact or proximity to the caregiver.  When a child experiences heightened arousal, he/she signals their caregiver.  Crying, smiling, and, locomotion, are examples of these signaling behaviors.  Instinctively, caregivers respond to their children’s behavior creating a reciprocal pattern of interaction.

2. A child should receive the continuous care of this single most important attachment figure for approximately the first two years of life.
Bowlby (1951) claimed that mothering is almost useless if delayed until after two and a half to three years and, for most children, if delayed till after 12 months, i.e. there is a critical period.
If the attachment figure is broken or disrupted during the critical two year period the child will suffer irreversible long-term consequences of this maternal deprivation.  This risk continues until the age of five.
Bowlby used the term maternal deprivation to refer to the separation or loss of the mother as well as failure to develop an attachment.
The underlying assumption of Bowlby’s Maternal Deprivation Hypothesis is that continual disruption of the attachment between infant and primary caregiver (i.e. mother) could result in long term cognitive, social, and emotional difficulties for that infant.  The implications of this are vast – if this is true, should the primary caregiver leave their child in day care, whilst they continue to work?

3. The long term consequences of maternal deprivation might include the following:
• delinquency, 
• reduced intelligence, 
• increased aggression, 
• depression, 
• affectionless psychopathy
Affectionless psychopathy is an inability to show affection or concern for others.  Such individuals act on impulse with little regard for the consequences of their actions.  For example, showing no guilt for antisocial behavior. 

4. Robertson and Bowlby (1952) believe that short term separation from an attachment figure leads to distress (i.e. the PDD model).
They found 3 progressive stages of distress:
  • Protest: The child cries, screams and protests angrily when the parent leaves. They will try to cling on to the parent to stop them leaving.
  • Despair: The child’s protesting begins to stop and they appear to be calmer although still upset. The child refuses others’ attempts for comfort and often seems withdrawn and uninterested in anything.
  • Detachment: If separation continues the child will start to engage with other people again. They will reject the caregiver on their return and show strong signs of anger.
5. The child’s attachment relationship with their primary caregiver leads to the development of an internal working model (Bowlby, 1969).
The quality of parental care was considered by Bowlby to be of vital importance to the child's development and future mental healyth. It was believed to be essential that the infant and young child should experience a warm, intimate, and continuous relationship with his mother (or permanent mother substitute) in which both found satisfaction and enjoyment. Given this relationship, emotions of guilt and anxiety (characteristics of mental illness when in excess) would develop in an organised and moderate way. Naturally extreme emotions would be moderated and become amenable to the control of the child's developing personality. He stated, "It is this complex rich and rewarding relationship with the mother in the early years, varied in countless ways by relations with the father and with siblings, that child psychiatrists and many others now believe to underlie the development of character and mental health.
Intenional Animal Cruelty Observed In Maternal Depravity Studies Of Rhesus Monkeys
________________________________________________________ 
Researchers have for years studied depression, alcoholism, aggression, maternal-infant bonding and other conditions and phenomena in nonhuman primates and other laboratory animals using an experimental maternal deprivation paradigm. Most influentially, Harry Harlow would, in the mid-1950s, begin raising infant monkeys in his UoW-Wisconsin laboratory in total or partial isolation and with inanimate surrogate mothers in an attempt to study maternal-infant bonding as well as various states of mental illness.
In Harlow’s laboratory, infant rhesus monkeys were immediately removed from their mothers and placed with cloth or wire surrogate mothers, sometimes called “iron maidens” by the researchers. Harlow found that the infants would become attached to their inanimate mothers –both those made of wire and those covered with cloth- and when removed from them they would “screech in terror”. Harlow and his colleagues would later develop “evil artificial mothers” meant to “impart fear and insecurity to infant monkeys” -including one designed with brass spikes- but contrary to the researcher’s hypothesis, these animals too demonstrated an attachment to their surrogates.
Subsequent experiments would study the effects of total and partial isolation on the animals’ mental health and interpersonal bonding using a stainless steel vertical chamber designed by Harlow, named the “pit of despair”, which was found to produce “profound and prolonged depression” in monkeys. Similarly, Harlow found that extended isolation in bare wire cages left monkeys with “profound behavioral abnormalities” including “self-clutching and rocking” and later “apathy and indifference to external stimulation”. Harlow likened this behavior to catatonic schizophrenia.
Later experiments were devised to test the mother-child bond with mothers who had themselves been reared in isolation as infants. This early deprivation was found to have retarded the mothers’ emotional development and her ability to engage in intercourse and in turn become pregnant. In response, Harlow and his colleagues created an apparatus to impregnate these mothers they named a “rape rack”. Harlow found that once these monkeys gave birth, they cared little for their offspring writing, “these monkey mothers that had never experienced love of any kind were devoid of love for their infants”. While some mothers simply ignored their children, Harlow characterized others as “evil” and abusive and in some instances reported them “crushing the infant's face to the floor, chewing off the infant's feet and fingers, and in one case… putting the infant's head in her mouth and crushing it like an eggshell.
Harlow’s experiments have been heralded as revolutionary and also robustly criticized as scientifically invalid and sadistically cruel. Writing on the researcher’s legacy, John Gluck, a former student of Harlow’s opined, “On the one hand, his work on monkey cognition and social development fostered a view of the animals as having rich subjective lives filled with intention and emotion. On the other, he has been criticized for the conduct of research that seemed to ignore the ethical implantations of his own discoveries.
Maternal deprivation experiments on nonhuman primates have continued into the 21st century and remain controversial. Stephen Suomi, an early collaborator of Harlow, has continued to conduct maternal deprivation experiments on rhesus monkeys in his NIH laboratory and has been vigorously criticized by PETA, Members of Congress and others