I must be compelled to keep poking adoptive families until somebody bites me. But here I go again...
This time it is a question I want to ask, not a statement I want to make. However, I know my set-up might prickle some people.
I'd like to talk about the role of salvation in adoption. Many families who first-choice adopt (adopt because they choose to, not as a decision they come to after experiencing infertility), do so because they want to contribute to the welfare of a child. An orphan, a child in poverty, a child who has been victimized, etc. They have the heartfelt, goodwill desire to bring a child into their family, and essentially save them from their circumstances.
From my perspective, that seems pretty legitimate, and I can see how the child's life is being beneffited by adoption (given they have no alternative of family reunification, kinship adoption, etc).
But then, I started reading adoptee perspectives and I have read numerous accounts of adoptees having STRONG feelings AGAINST "being saved". By their adoptive parents. I've read that the dynamic that can create in a family is that 1. the adoptee isn't permitted by others or themself to grieve the things they have lost, 2. people always tell them "aren't you thankful that you were adopted" and they actually resent that sentiment, 3. an inequitous power dynamic can be created between the "savior" parents and the "victim" child.
I've always thought that the worst fate for a child would be to grow up in an institution, in foster care, on the street, or in an abusive setting. I've always advocated for children in those situations to be able to find permanence with a healthy, loving, and stable family. Then, lo and behold, I am SHOCKED to read Orphan Daughter writing Musings On the Stork Warehouse. She says that she would rather have grown up in the group home she was in, instead of being adopted! Can you imagine? I never had considered that possibility. She had siblings in the group home, she had trusted caretakers, she had routine and order. I don't know her story but she says that the damaging experiences she was supposed to have escaped via adoption, she still experienced (homelessness, prostitution).
What do we do with adult adoptees telling us "I would have rather stayed in my country", "I didn't want to be saved", "I didn't want to be adopted", I wish I had been left where I was"?
How do we reconcile the real need children experience, our desire to adopt children, and children's desires about their circumstances? I understand that an older child can articulate what they want, in considering a placement, but what about infants and young children?
Is the satisfaction an adoptee ultimately feels about their adoption based on the health and respect of their adoptive family?
These are all questions I'm thinking about and I'm just throwing them out there. I'd love to hear your responses. This is one topic where I am more questions than answers!
1- "choosing to minimize or disregard a person's color is part of white privilege.": A person saying they don't "notice" color does not mean they are minimizing or disregarding their race. It may simply mean it is not foremost in their impression or their opinion of that person.
2- "Ambivalence about race is the luxury of a person who does not experience discrimination based on their race": Ambivalence about race is not a bad thing. These people mean it in a way such as they have no preference for one over the other. They are not all discounting the race of a person as in the culture and heritage of their ethnicity that makes up who they are. They are simply saying they don't think of them as being different as a person. There is nothing more to it than that. They are saying that they see a person, a human being, who may have a different color of skin, but is living in the same country, in the same world, as anyone else; white, black, tan or whatever. Skin color is not the total of who they are. Not the total. Not "noticing" skin tone does not equal parents not noticing who they are as a person, ethnicity included.
As much as you have stereotyped people who are not in your position and may misspeak things (according to you), I think you are just as guilty of jumping to conclusions and only looking at the way you see things as anyone on any side of this difference.