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.

Tuesday, April 11, 2017

Trauma Symptoms Adoptee Behavior


The Trauma Symptoms and Behaviors In Adoptees

The goal of my contribution to adoption psychology is to find the
questions, (answers come much, much later, if ever). To fill in the blanks that the U.S. psychology society intentionally left out when they refused to study adoption and refer to all adoption problems as related to attachment theory, and come to some form of acceptance of my forced adopted plight and psychological consequences.

I have an extreme phobia of doctors (and authority figures)
to the extreme position I took when I quit nursing. It seemed that the treatments were more damaging than the related illness that stood against my principles. I took my biological aunt to the doctor for osteo injections, seven days of dread and on the appointment day sheer anxiety and panic to the point of being awake 36 hours from hypervigilance. During my quiet escape from reality, I realized that medical authority was directly related to my many contributing factors to PTSD, from being the mother of a pediatric cancer patient that had two onsets. The ten years of caregiving where I begged to be sent to a mental hospital and had a brakedown. Abusive adult relationships where I played the submissive part that I was conditioned to in forced replacement adoption, down to the first primal wounding of my existence.  They all are emotional suppressed time periods of total dependence, helplessness, unworthiness, and based in fear. I continue to be unable to express emotions, as no one really wants to hear my bad experiences where I did play a part the victim, the healer, the aggressor and the solid stone mother that nothing could penetrate or I would not allow myself to have the reflective thoughts that are needed to process traumatic events. Doctors were in bed with the adoption machine, when I worked for doctors I had control. When I did not nurse I was not, am not in control, and they can force drugs, treatments and surgeries on me against my will. Even though I have a legal, active, yearly updated DnR, I don't trust it or the doctors that refuse to accept patient wishes. What I do know is that I keep reading, searching and hoping for answers that are real and continue to refuse pleasant polite acquaintance chit-chat, as it undermines the adoptee's words, thoughts and hope. To be real in my everyday truth is overwhelming to those that seek pleasantries that undermine the effort at healing, as there can be no healing without constant wound pain.   

Saturday, April 8, 2017

Psychological Abandonment


Adopted Child's Abandonment "Primal Wound"
The newborn child that is separated, taken from the biological mother at birth, severs the continuation of this biological bond and results in abandonment for the newborn child. Regardless of the mothers inability to fight off unscrupulous adoption agents that procure children for sale, the child's abandonment results in the "primal wound" that the child will live with and dread the reality of the abandonment for life.
This article is based on psychological abandonment, not P.W..
Emotional abandonment is a subjective emotional state in which people feel undesired, left behind, insecure, or discarded. People experiencing emotional abandonment may feel at loss, cut off from a crucial source of sustenance that has been withdrawn, either suddenly, or through a process of erosion. In a classic abandonment scenario, the severance of the emotional bond is unilateral, that is, it is the object of one’s attachment that has chosen to break the connection. Feeling rejected, which is a significant component of emotional abandonment, has a biological impact in that it activates the physical pain centers in the brain and can leave an emotional imprint in the brain’s warning system. Abandonment has been a staple of poetry and literature since ancient times. 

Separation anxiety, a substrate of emotional abandonment, is recognized as a primary source of human distress and dysfunction. When we experience a threat to or disconnection in a primary attachment, it triggers a fear response referred to as separation stress or separation anxiety. Separation stress has been the subject of extensive research in psychological and neurobiological fields, and has been shown to be a universal response to separation in the animal world of which human beings are a part. When lab rat pups are separated from their mothers for periods of time, researchers measure their distress vocalizations and stress hormones to determine varying conditions of the separation response. As the rats mature, their subsequent reactive behaviors and stress hormones are reexamined and are shown to bear a striking resemblance to the depression, anxiety avoidance behaviors, and self defeated posturing displayed by human beings known to have suffered earlier separation traumas.
Owing to the neocortical component of human functioning, when human beings lose a primary relationship, they grasp its potential repercussions (i.e. they may feel uncertain about the future or fear being unable to climb out of an abyss), thus encumbering an additional layer of separation stress. To abandon is "to withdraw one's support or help from, especially in spite of duty, allegiance, or responsibility; desert: abandon a friend in trouble." When the loss is due to the object’s voluntary withdrawal, a common response is to feel unworthy of love. This indicates the tendency for people to blame the rejection on themselves. "Am I unworthy of love, destined to grow old and die all alone, bereft of human connection or caring?" Questioning one’s desirability as a mate and fearing eternal isolation are among the additional anxieties incurred in abandonment scenarios. The concurrence of self devaluation and primal fear distinguish abandonment grief from most other types of bereavement.  
Psychological trauma
The depression of abandonment grief creates a sustained type of stress that constitutes an emotional trauma which can be severe enough to leave an emotional imprint on individuals' psychobiological functioning, affecting future choices and responses to rejection, loss, or disconnection. A contributing factor to the trauma-producing event is that 'being left' triggers primal separation fear, also referred to as primal abandonment fear – the fear of being left with no one to take care of one’s vital needs. Our first anxiety is a response to separation from Mother. This sensation is stored in the amygdala – a structure set deep into the brain’s emotional memory system responsible for conditioning the fight/freeze/flight response to fear. Primal fear may have been initiated by birth trauma and even have some prenatal antecedents. The emotional memory system is fairly intact at or before birth and lays down traces of the sensations and feelings of the infant’s separation experiences. These primitive feelings are reawakened by later events, especially those reminiscent of unwanted or abrupt separations from a source of sustenance.
In adulthood, being left arouses primal fear along with other primitive sensations which contribute to feelings of terror and outright panic. Infantile needs and urgencies reemerge and can precipitate a symbiotic regression in which individuals feel, at least momentarily, unable to survive without the lost object. People may also experience the intense stress of helplessness. When they make repeated attempts to compel their loved one to return and are unsuccessful, they feel helpless and inadequate to the task. This helplessness causes people to feel possessed of what Michael Balint calls “a limited capacity to perform the work of conquest – the work necessary to transform an indifferent object into a participating partner.” According to Balint, feeling one’s ‘limited capacity’ is traumatic in that it produces a fault line in the psyche which renders the person vulnerable heightened emotional responses within primary relationships.
Another factor contributing to the traumatic conditions is the stress of losing one’s background object. A background object is someone on whom individuals have come to rely in ways they did not realize until the object is no longer present. For instance, the relationship served as a mutual regulatory system. Multiple psychobiological systems helped to maintain individuals’ equilibrium. As members of a couple, they became external regulators for one another. They were attuned on many levels: their pupils dilated in synchrony, they echoed one another’s speech patterns, movements, and even cardiac and EEG rhythms. As a couple, they functioned like a mutual bio-feedback system, stimulating and modulating each other’s bio rhythms, responding to one another’s pheromones, and addicting to the steady trickle of endogenous opiates induced by the relationship. When the relationship ends, the many processes it helped to regulate go into disarray. As the emotional and bio-physiological effects mount, the stressful process is heightened by the knowledge that it was not you, but your loved one who chose withdraw from the bond. This knowledge may cause people to interpret their intense emotional responses to the disconnection as evidence of their putative weakness and ‘limited capacity to perform the work of conquest’.
Some people who experience the traumatic stress of abandonment go on to develop post traumatic symptoms. Post traumatic symptoms associated with abandonment include a sequela of heightened emotional reactions (ranging from mild to severe) and habituated defense mechanisms (many of which have become maladaptive) to perceived threats or disruptions to one’s sense of self or to one’s connections.
There are various predisposing psycho-biological and environmental factors that go into determining whether one’s earlier emotional trauma might lead to the development of a true clinical picture of post-traumatic stress disorder. One factor has to do with variation in certain brain structures. According to  Jerome Kagan, some people are born with a locus coerulous that tends to produce higher concentrations of norepinephrine, a brain chemical involved in arousal of your body's self-defense response. This would lower their threshold for becoming aroused and make them more likely to become anxious when they encounter stresses in life that are reminiscent of childhood separations and fears, hence making them more prone to becoming posttraumatic.

Wednesday, April 5, 2017

Sibling Rivalry Effect on Adopted Children & Article Sibling Rivalry


The Sibling Rivalry Effect on Adoptees
In dysfunctional adoptive families the adopted child is resented
by the adoptive parent's biological children. When the adoptive mother is indifferent to the adopted child, the biological child takes on the role of punishment enforcer and executioner. The biological child does the physical enforcement of the adopted child and receives more favor ant attention by the mother. The biological child's ongoing revenge of the adopted child, is a primal response for taking away from him mother's attention and resources. His enforcement duty becomes an unconscious drive as he is repulsed by the outsider adopted child's existence and intuitively perceives his mother's disgust and ambivalence of the adopted child's presence. Due to the fact that the adopted child's temporary place in the adoptive family in conditional, the adopted-child-role is one of submission, injustice and blame for all of the biological family's problems, as the biological child experience of family continuity ended when the adopted child was introduced to the family. The biological child's perception and experience of everything changing in his family, his mother's depression, anger and hostility toward the adopted child, who he clearly sees as the enemy that is completely logical and the direct result of cause and effect.

In our culture it is the mother (in this case the adoptive mother) who dictates how her family will operate. The mother designates who is the most favored child, the next in line for her attention and who is not favored as she grimaces at the thought of affection toward the unwanted child that she is forced to have a relationship with.

The proud mother of two biological sons, that longs for a girl child that will be exactly like her. The intention, the pregnancy and the catastrophic result where this wished for female offspring dies at birth. Where all hope is lost in a tragic instant that inspired distorted coping mechanisms to quickly fix a shattered experience.
In my case the child adopted to fix the grief, that replaced the mother's third expected child was quickly realized to be a terrible mistake. The mother's grief based compulsion to adoption was realized too late as a monumental error in judgement. The grieving mother's error in overestimating child adoption, decision making under extreme depression and psychopathic trauma as a way to abandon her grief was realized far too late. This reckless decision during a grief reaction period when the reality of this consequence is finally realized, it could not be admitted to. There was no remedy to fix the inaccurate confusion of adopting that brought more depression, grief and denial.  The misinterpretation of adoption caused more harm as the misjudgment could not be repaired, the child would not be returned due to the social stigma attached to returning an adopted child. The adoptive mother denied her delusion based error and went on with life valuing her sons and excluding her adoption error. The valued sons took on the role of policing the adopted child to gain attention and praise.
These roles are set in stone as the behavior prompted and that originates with the mother's distress and alleviation of that distress are the foundations of what propels the actors to participate in the roles of their mother's play. The foundational roles of childhood designation continues throughout the relationships of the group members, never deviating from their assigned roles later in life.  
Sibling Rivalry Article:
The new view holds that conflict is not the natural state of sibling relationships. Still, for a third of us, discord sown early endures for a lifetime.
While few adult siblings have severed their ties completely, approximately one-third of them describe their relationship as rivalry or distant. They don't get along with their sibling, have little in common, spend limited time together, and use words like "competitive," "humiliating," and "hurtful" to depict their childhoods. 
The speed with which old childhood designations that create adult conflicts reduce these adults to children again prevents them from seeing one another in a new or adult light.    They push each other's buttons without knowing why or how and recast themselves in the same childhood roles that never worked in the first place.
When they talk about their brothers and sisters, adult siblings locked into old patterns and resort to a variety of familiar emotional strategies. Some try to diminish the relationship (and their feelings) by emphasizing the importance of friends and spouses instead. Some speak with frightening venom as they describe the horrors of growing up under the same roof. 
Others become very analytical, piecing together all that went wrong between them, thereby detailing the impossibility of ever finding common ground. (denying the past is common-ground?) 
For most conflicted brothers and sisters, there is an underlying sense that "this is the way it's supposed to be." (old distorted patterns from dysfunctional family dynamics)
Western culture has an obsession with sibling rivalry that began with the story of Cain and Abel and was elaborated by Freud, who labeled and dwelt on the competition between siblings for parental love and attention. It's colored our perception of sibling rivalry ever since. Therapists and lay people alike tend to view the relationship largely as one of struggle and controversy. We have no rituals that make, break, or celebrate the sibling bond. And family experts have underemphasized the sibling relationship, instead concentrating on parents and children and husbands and wives. Small wonder that sibling rivalry is accepted as the normal state of affairs.
There is a consensus among clinicians and developmental psychologists that the sibling bond is complicated, fluid, and influenced by many factors. Parental treatment, genetics, gender, life events, ethnic and generational patterns, and people and experiences outside the family all contribute to the success or failure of a particular sibling connection. To understand how these factors shape the lives of siblings, researchers have begun looking at young siblings within the context of their immediate families.
(How Parents shape sibling rivalry...)
At the forefront of this work is Judy Dunn, whose pioneering sibling studies are being conducted in her native England and in the United States. Through her observational studies of siblings at home instead of in the lab, Dunn's work presents a radically revised view of children's abilities and their social understanding. Dunn now knows that from the startlingly young age of one year, siblings respond to disputes between their siblings by supporting or punishing one of the antagonists. These same young siblings are profoundly affected by their mother's interaction with the other siblings.
"The message is," Dunn said, "that children are far more socially sophisticated than we ever imagined. That little 15-month-old or 17-month-old is watching like a hawk what goes on between her mother and older sibling. And the greater the difference in the maternal affection and attention, the more hostility and conflict between the siblings." From 18 months on siblings understand how to comfort, hurt, and exacerbate each other's pain. They understand family rules, can differentiate between transgressions of different sorts, and can anticipate the response of adults to their own and to other people's misdeeds.
By age three, children have a sophisticated grasp of how to use social rules for their own benefit. They can evaluate themselves in relation to their siblings and possess the developmental skills necessary to adapt to frustrating circumstances and relationships in the family. Whether they have the drive to adapt, to get along with a sibling whose goals and interests may be different from their own, can make the difference between a cooperative or rivalrous relationship, Dunn insists.
Parents' relationships with each of their children are very closely involved in sibling rivalry. As Dunn's work reveals, from one year on children are acutely sensitive of how they're being treated in relation to their siblings. When a parent shows more love, gives more attention, or is unable or unwilling to monitor the goings-on between children, it is often the siblings and their connections that suffer. Even though the social awareness and development of children is far more sophisticated than imagined, children don't possess the ability to understand who or what may have turned them against one another. 
Most rivalrous adult siblings aren't able to see the total picture, especially as adults.
Parental action and inaction have had a long-lasting impact on the rivalrous relationship between Karen Kalish and her sister. Grieved by the death of one twin and consumed with taking care of the surviving one, Karen's mother had no time for 30-month-old Karen. A nurse was hired to tend to her, and Karen, her mother, and her baby sister spent little if no time together. Karen was not only dethroned by the birth of her sister; she was abandoned. "She was left out... pushed out of the family orbit," said Kenneth Addison, associate professor of developmental psychology at Northeastern Illinois University. "She was not given the role of oldest child or any other responsibilities that go along with that position."
Even when parents do their best at loving and respecting all of their children, the influence of siblings on one another can be enormous. Brothers and sisters spend more time together during childhood than with their parents, particularly today when nearly 60 percent of mothers with children work outside the home. If the siblings are close in age and/or the same gender, the greater the potential for intense dysfunctional relationships.
Studies have shown that of the three sibling pairs, sister/sister pairs are the closest and brother/brother pairs are the most rivalrous. (Identical male twins tend to be the most competitive.) Sisters are the traditional kin keepers in our society and have a real commitment to keeping the relationship going. They are, according to sex-role expectations, more adept at expressing themselves on a personal level and in sharing their intimate feelings. Brothers, on the other hand, are more conflicted. Their childhood time together tends to be more competitive, and often that competition is carried into adulthood, exacerbated, it seems, by parental and societal expectations of men.
What makes brother/brother ties so rivalrous? Gold has launched a new study that is not yet completed. But she has found a consistent theme running through the interviews she's conducted thus far. "The thing that rides through with brothers that doesn't come across in other sibling pairs is this notion of parental and societal comparison. Somehow with boys, it seems far more natural to compare them, especially more than with sister/brother pairs. Almost from day one, the fundamental developmental markers--who gets a tooth first, who crawls, walks, speaks first--are held up on a larger-than-life scale. And this comparison appears to continue from school to college to the workplace. Who has the biggest house, who makes the most money, drives the best car are constant topics of discussion. In our society, men are supposed to be achievement-oriented, aggressive. They're supposed to succeed."
Sibling relationships are not fixed, however; they change dramatically over the years. Key life events in early and middle childhood can bring siblings closer together--or split them further apart. Dunn found that such events as a mother's illness and, in one case, a mother's death prompted siblings to be tremendously supportive of one another and to close ranks in the face of stress. The transition to school, on the other hand, diminishes the relationship between older and younger siblings.
Similarly, life events in adulthood--leaving home, getting married, tending to an ill parent, grieving over a parent's death, adjusting to an empty nest have the power to significantly alter the connection between siblings or to reinforce old rivalries. When it comes to the marriages of our siblings, for example, we are not unlike ex-husbands or ex-wives.
"Our brothers and sisters were our 'first' marriage partners," says Karen Lewis, a counseling psychologist and coeditor of Siblings in Therapy, a collection of writings about siblings. "We have a lot of emotional stock invested in them and in the spouses they choose." How will their entrance into the family affect how we all get along? Are our sisters- or brothers-in-law like us? Are they good enough to be one of the family? Apparently, many are not. In one of the few studies of young- and middle- adult siblings, two-thirds of the siblings interviewed said that the marriage of their brothers and sisters drove a wedge between them. Their already-conflicted relationships were exacerbated, or sibling relationships that appeared sound suddenly became strained.
In the interview I conducted for my book on siblings, stories of strained relationships following one or the other's marriage far outweighed stories of marriages that enhanced the sibling connection. In several cases, the spouse was "not like anybody else in the family." Siblings found it difficult to try to get along with sisters- or brothers-in-law who were different and sometimes difficult. For some, the new family member was seen as someone who made an effort to keep siblings apart. (and they do)
Yet another sibling talked about how his sister's husband destroyed their relationship. For some rivalrous siblings, divorce offers another chance to improve the relationship. In a few cases, adjustments are made. For the others, the rift can last a lifetime.

Monday, April 3, 2017

They Were Looking For Me


They Were Looking For Me

There is something so significant and monumental to an adoptee with no identity or sense of self-worth, in knowing that someone in this world was looking for me. To be intentionally abandoned by those you belong to is to be banished deliberately to a cruel world where you knew in your heart that you never belonged.
To be told over and again that your very existence is a liability that takes away from others these precious efforts that should never be wasted on such a worthless cause of an unwanted child. Where these efforts of kindness turn into anger and rage as they are unnatural, guilt provoked as society's expected duty that is forced on an adoptive mother. Where dread and grief are provoked in the mother by the sound of the adopted baby's cries,
no relief can be found in the grieving adoptive mother except for repulsion and removal of the needy unwanted infant. To allow another to exist in torment is to drain the energy from the other.
To coexist in disdain and ambiguity where the one of less worth is assigned blame and projected as the problem that becomes their designation in the family group. Where we are not wanted but forced to be, although we know no alternative to how we live as children. We accept this designation without argument or malice as we don't know any better and rely on the resources of others for survival. Like the token family dog is banished from the home and chained outside and away from the group, we still want to be with the group. The isolation and lack of interaction takes it's toll on us, makes us mean and unpredictable.

Then there lies this jagged edge, a sharp glimmer of hope in a message that lives outside these prison walls and is kept from the child's real family. The sharp object of truth that could cut our flesh to the bone or give us hope...the hope for being loved and to love our real family is sometimes seen as a gift that might make an unwanted child arrogant, greedy and is seen as all bad by the adoptive parent that chooses to keep the adopted child submissive and dominated for the adoptive mother's own well being. As she does not care for the child, but doesn't want to loose title of her hated object that serves a particular purpose.

If my adoptive mother knew someone was looking for me, sent me letters or wanted to love me she would have been repulsed and angry at such a gift that no adopted child of her's deserved. The gift of love would be labeled dangerous to the family's dysfunctional way of life. This message of love would have and does become the public enemy to the institution of adoption. I would have never been told of a phone call, a letter all would have been burned and I would have been punished again for reasons unknown to me. Why my adoptive mother was so angry this day or that day seemed irrelevant to me as all days were living the same fear of mother. But hope is despised when it is in the form of what an adopted child needs most, to fill the adoptive mother's designated place where her anger is directed, to be that adopted child who accepts punishment without knowing why or asking why and to be the perpetual punching bag adopted child to the grieving mother that lost her real child to stillbirth.  

When the hope finally arrived, I was safely away from the adoptive mother's cruelty. I refused to share my joy with anyone as the feeling of joy can be ruined by another's condemning words or selfishness. When my hope came I was able to embrace it knowing all those terrible years, I was being looked for by my blood relatives. I was missing from their history, from their narratives and missing from their life. To imagine that someone out there loved me unconditionally because I was their blood, their family and their missing connection that they never gave up looking for me. I was always too afraid to dream or imagine such a connection as I couldn't bear the thought of knowing it could be taken from me. Such imaginations were taboo to a child that has lost all hope in family, the world and in themselves.

Sunday, April 2, 2017

Baby-Scoop Era Caused Psychopathy


Baby Scoop Era Caused Psychopathy

Psychological Disability in Exiled Mothers

This Australian doctor parallels adoption separation with the unresolvable grief of families whose sons were MIA (missing in action).
Summary of "Psychological Disability in Women who Relinquish a Baby for Adoption," by Dr. John T. Condon (Medical Journal of Australia) Vol 144 Feb 3 1986
Existing evidence suggests that the experience of relinquishment renders a woman at high risk of psychological (and possibly physical) disability. Moreover very recent research indicates that actual disability or vulnerability may not diminish even decades after the event.
Condon defines how the relinqishment experience differs from perinatal bereavement in four crucial psychological aspects.
  • Firstly: although construed as "voluntary" most relinquishing mothers feel the relinquishment is their only option in the face of financial hardship, pressure from family, professionals and social stigma associated with illegitimacy.
  • Secondly: their child continues to exist and develop while remaining inaccessible to them, and one day may be reunited with them. The situation is analogous to that of relatives of servicemen missing "believed dead" (MIA). The reunion fantasy renders it impossible to "say goodbye" with any sense of finality. Disabling chronic grief reactions were particularly common in the war in such relatives.
  • Thirdly: the lack of knowledge of the child permits the development of a variety of disturbing fantasies, such as the child being dead, or ill, unhappy or hating his or her relinquishing mother. The guilt of relinquishment is thereby augmented.
  • Fourthly: the women perceive their efforts to acquire knowledge about their child (which would give them something to let go of) as being blocked by an uncaring bureaucracy. Shawyer describes poignantly how "confidential files are tauntingly kept just out of reach, across official desks". Thus the anger that is associated with the original event is kept alive and refocused onto those who continue to come between mother and child.
On a study of twenty women who relinquished their baby, all but two of them reported strong feelings of affection for the infant, both during the late pregnancy and in the immediate post partum period. None reported negative feelings toward the child.
Feelings of sadness or depression at the time of relinquishment were rated on the average as intense and "the most intense ever experienced". Anger at the time of relinquishment was rated at the time as between "a great deal and intense." Only 33% reported a decrease over time, and over one half said their anger had increased. Guilt at the time was rated as "intense" with only 17% reporting a decrease over the intervening years.
Almost all the women reported they had received little or no help from family, friends or professionals. Over half of them had used alcohol or sedative medication to help them cope after relinquishment. Almost all reported that they dealt with their distress by withdrawing and bottling up their feelings. One third had subsequently sought professional help.
A most striking finding in the present study is that the majority of these women reported no diminution of their sadness, anger and guilt over the considerable number of years which had elapsed since their relinquishment. A significant number actually reported an intensification of these feelings especially anger.
Taken overall, the evidence suggests that over half of these women are suffering from severe and disabling grief reactions which are not resolved over the passage of time and which manifest predominantly as depression and psychosomatic illness.
A variety of factors operated to impede the grieving process in these women. Their loss was not acknowledged by family and professionals, who denied them the support necessary for the expression of their grief. Intense anger, shame and guilt complicated their mourning, which was further inhibited by the fantasy of eventual reunion with their child. Many were too young to have acquired the ego strength necessary to grieve in an unsupported environment.
Few had sufficient contact with the child at birth or received sufficient information to enable them to construct an image of what they had lost. Masterson (1976) has demonstrated that mourning cannot proceed without a clear mental picture of what has been lost.
The notion that maternal attachment can be avoided by a brisk removal of the infant at birth and the avoidance of subsequent contact between mother and child is strongly contradicted in recent research. Condon and others have demonstrated an intense attachment to the unborn child in most pregnant women.
There is a strong impression from data that over-protectiveness is part of the phenomenon of unresolved grief and serves both to assuage guilt and compensate for the severe blow dealt by relinquishment to the self esteem in the area of being a "good mother".
The relatively high instance of pregnancy during the year after relinquishment invites speculation that this represents a maladaptive coping strategy that involves a "replacement baby".

Psychological Dilemma of the Adoptee & Unwanted Child Study


The Unwanted Child Psychology Study & Psychological Dilemma of Being Adopted

The magnitude findings in the reality of the unwanted pregnancy in this 30 year study in Finland and Norway is ongoing and continues to publish data related to the detrimental effects of being unwanted at conception.

For adoptee's from the Baby-Scoop era all are unwanted and unintended pregnancies, yet we were allowed to mature in utero developing relationships with our mother-self-bond and at birth we were stolen and given to more appropriate, deserving and financially stable couples according to societal judgments.
Through forced adoption we were not necessarily unwanted by our family, as our mother's protested this impossible forced situation that kept her from asserting her human right to parent her offspring. Forced adoption where we are sold and bought by unrelated strangers to be owned by them.

The adoption conditioning to act appropriately grateful, which is against our true nature, yet the manifestation of being adopted is an unnatural act in itself. We adoptees were told, assumed we were unwanted by our adoptive parents whose best interests depend on this lie. And wanted through false assumptions about the adopted child that deny our primal instincts, that reinforce our true nature is in fact unwanted by the adopters.

The truth can only be attained by a reunion with biological family in developing a continued relationship that was severed at our birth. The baby scoop era stole babies from their mother's arms systematically denying her rights and objectifying the child as chattel to be profited by. To solve the adopted child's conundrum is in fact dependent on factual evidence that is not biased by the adoptive parent's need for their own psychological safety. Yet most of us will struggle with this false perception that being taken against our mothers will is perceived by the newborn as being abandoned that is not the fault of our mother.

We the adopted child and our mother are the victims of a tragic practice that is based on supply and demand products of a system based on financial gain. We are hurting, our mother is hurting though years brings denial, defense coping mechanisms and false assumptions that cover up the original tragedy that brought us here. That we were and are the hostages in societal games for who has the most toys. The only way to reconcile this lie is to search for our origins and find our truth to comprehend our origins that is the adoptee's psychological dilemma.

When Pregnancies are UnwantedBy Nancy Felipe Russo, Ph.D., Arizona State University and Henry P. David, Ph.D., Transnational Family Research Institute
Bonding and love between parent and child is a crucial foundation for family integrity and wholesome child development. It is sometimes said that parenthood, particularly motherhood, is a 'natural' condition in which 'there is always room for one more.' But can all parents learn to love a child who was unwanted during pregnancy? Further, even if a woman does love a child born after an unwanted pregnancy, is love ever enough to ensure wholesome child development? Although it is true that unwanted pregnancy does not always translate into unwanted births, research on the development of children who were unwanted during pregnancy suggests that when women say they cannot adequately care for a child, it is important to listen to them.
Both unintended and unwanted childbearing can have negative health, social, and psychological consequences. Health problems include greater chances for illness and death for both mother and child. In addition, such childbearing has been linked with a variety of social problems, including divorce, poverty, child abuse, and juvenile delinquency. In one study, unwanted children were found less likely to have had a secure family life. As adults they were more likely to engage in criminal behavior, be on welfare, and receive psychiatric services. Another found that children who were unintended by their mothers had lower self-esteem than their intended peers 23 years later.
The adverse health consequences of teenagers' inability to control their childbearing can be particularly severe. Teenage mothers are more likely to suffer toxemia, anemia, birth complications, and death. Babies of teenage mothers are more likely to have low birth weight and suffer birth injury and neurological defects. Such babies are twice as likely to die in the first year of life as babies born to mothers who delay childbearing until after age 20.
Although high?quality prenatal care can largely prevent the physical health problems of these children, research has established that their social and psychological problems persist, partially because the mothers are themselves from disadvantaged backgrounds, but also due to the lack of future education and poor employment prospects of teenage mothers. Children born to teenagers are more likely to have lower achievement scores and poorer school adjustment and problem behaviors than children born to older women.
The burden of unintended and unwanted childbearing often compounds social disadvantage, falling disproportionately on women who are young, poor, or members of ethnic minority groups. In 1994, 49 per cent of pregnancies in the U.S. were unintended, with the highest rates of such pregnancies found in women who were between 18-24 years of age, poor, unmarried, Black, or Hispanic. The portrait could be worse: About 54 per cent of those unintended pregnancies were terminated by abortion. When abortion is legal, women who are the most motivated to avoid unwanted childbearing are most likely to seek this option. If they are able to exercise it, the correlation between unwanted childbearing and negative outcomes in the remaining population giving birth is reduced (albeit not eliminated).
Access to abortion continues to play a major role in the prevention of unwanted births around the world. In developed countries (where average desired family size is small), of the 28 million pregnancies occurring every year, an estimated 49 per cent are unplanned; 36 per cent end in abortion. In developing countries (where average desired family size is larger), of the 182 million pregnancies occurring every year, an estimated 36 per cent are unplanned; 20 per cent end in abortion.
Longitudinal research has found that when abortion is denied, the resulting children are more likely to have a variety of social and psychological problems, even when they are born to adult women who are healthy with intact marriages and adequate economic resources. A long term study of children born in 1961-63 to women twice denied abortion for the same pregnancy and pair matched control children born to women who did not request abortion showed significant differences, always in disfavor of the unwanted children. All the children were born into complete families with similar socioeconomic circumstances. Being 'born unwanted' carried a risk of negative psychosocial development, especially for only children who had no siblings. At age nine they did poorer in school (despite no differences on intelligence tests), were less popular with classmates, and were more frequently described by mothers and teachers as being difficult. By age 21 -23 they reported less job satisfaction, more conflict with coworkers and supervisors, and more disappointments in love. By age 35 they had experienced more mental health problems.
In summary, there is a substantial literature that documents the serious health, social, psychological, and economic consequences of unintended and unwanted childbearing. These consequences can include increased maternal and infant death and illness, unstable marriages, and the restriction of educational and occupational opportunities leading to poverty and limited roles for women. These adverse effects are not shared equally by all segments of society, and in the United States fall more heavily on those who are poor, young, or members of an ethnic minority group. Further, evidence suggests that even in advantageous social and economic circumstances, when a pregnancy is unwanted and the women requests an abortion, to deny it forces her to bear a child at risk for psychological problems that are long lasting. In this context, the watchword of the family planning movement - 'Every Child a Wanted Child' has particular meaning for health professionals.
This essay draws upon and updates an essay titled 'When Children are Unwanted' by the authors that was previously published as a Social Issue release from the Board of Social & Ethical Responsibility for Psychology of the American Psychological Association (n.d.).
Additional references:
Alan Guttmacher Institute (1999). Sharing responsibility: Women, society, and abortion worldwide. New York: Alan Guttmacher Institute.
Axinn, W.G., Barber, J. S., & Thornton, A. (1998). The Long-Term Impact of Parents' Childbearing Decisions on Children's Self-Esteem, Demography, 35, 435-443.
David, H.P. (1992). Born unwanted: Long-term developmental effects of denied abortion. Journal of Social Issues, 48, 163-181.
Henshaw, S. K. (1998). Unintended pregnancies in the United States, Family Planning Perspectives, 30 (1), 24-29, 46.
Kost, ., Landry, D. J., & Darroch, J. E. (1998) Predicting Maternal Behaviors During Pregnancy: Does Intention Status Matter? Family Planning Perspectives, 30(2), 79-88.
Kubicka, L., Matejcek, Z., David, H.P., Dytrych, Z., Miller, W.B., and Roth, Z. (1995). Childrenfrom unwanted pregnancies in Prague, Czech Republic revisited at age Thirty. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 91, 361-369.
Matejcek, Z., Dytrych, Z., and Schüller, V. (1978). Children from unwanted pregnancies. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 57, 67-90.
Matejcek, Z., Dytrych, Z., and Schüller, V., (1992). On the prognosis of children from unwanted pregnancies (In German). Der Kinderarzt, 23,1838-1842.
Matejcek, Z., Dytrych, Z, and Schüller, V. (1992). On the prevention of psychological subdeprivation (In German). Der Kinderarzt, 23, 1843-1845.
Myhrman, A.,Olsen, P., Rantakallio, P., and Laara, E.,(1995). Does the wantedness of a pregnancy predict a child's educational attainment? Family Planning Perspectives, 27, 116-119.
Myhrman, A., Rantakallio, P., Sohanni, M.,Jones, P., and Partanen, U. (1996).Unwantedness of a pregnancy and schizophrenia in the child. British Journal of Psychiatry, 169, 637-640.
Russo, N. F. (1992). Psychological aspects of unwanted pregnancy and its resolution. In J. D. Butler & D. F. Walbert (Eds.). Abortion, Medicine, and the Law. 4th Edition (pp. 593-626). NY: Facts on File.
Denious, J. & Russo, N. F. (2000). The Socio-Political Context of Abortion and its Relationship to Women's Mental Health. In J. Ussher (Ed.). Women's Health: Contemporary International Perspectives (pp. 431-439). London: British Psychological Society.
David, H.P., Dytrych, Z., Matejcek, Z., and Schuller, V. (1988). Born unwanted: Developmental effects of denied abortion. New York: Springer Publishing Co.