Trans and Adopted

I will admit that I don’t have a solution other than the “acceptance” in my image as I have not had to respond to an issue of this kind so far in my lifetime. I do know someone who did a great job of handling this with grace that I deeply admire. Today’s story from an adoptive mother (not my own story) –

What do you do when a kid’s mom is transphobic, and that kid wants a relationship with their mom more than anything? Mom refuses to talk on the phone but will usually respond to Facebook messages, which aren’t frequent at child’s choice. Child wants more contact but also knows mom doesn’t accept her and it’s a constant balancing act I think.

Mom’s Facebook got hacked and I had to locate her new one. She had unfriended me (but would still message) – so, I felt conflicted about finding her because I wasn’t sure she wanted to be found. Child wanted to send her a Mother’s Day message. It was the first time we had reached out since she got a new Facebook.

Mom responded (it’s been at least a year since the last contact) and says thank you and she loves and misses her but she will never accept her as a girl and she will always be her son.

I’m ashamed to admit I went off. I could not believe this was what she had to say after so long without contact and I know daughter is going to be gutted. She’s been asking all day, if her mom responded and I can’t face her right now. I apologized to her mom and said I don’t want to fight, that we envisioned a life of lots of visits and summers spent with her and daughter is so upset mom refuses to talk to her and is going to be completely devastated when I read her the message.

The bottom line is that mom should never have lost her daughter, and when I found mom and heard her story (post adoption, agency said they couldn’t locate mom and I read something about names being spelled wrong on birth certificates which allowed me to finally find mom) I was all for working towards reunification. But that’s never even be on the table because of the transphobia.

I find myself continually wanting to convince mom she’s being ridiculous (transphobia is so far from our reality in our progressive bubble that I literally cannot wrap my head around it, we didn’t even blink when daughter came out), but I also know she’s a victim of this situation.

Questions – How do I tell daughter her mom’s response? (She has an adoption competent therapist who is also LGTBQ+ competent). How do I help daughter balance this? I want to support her relationship with mom and I’m also so angry at mom for letting this come between her and the child that was taken from her.

An adoptee responds – I have to question whether information is missing here.

“I’m ashamed to admit I went off.” — what does this mean? It is a balancing act when you are dealing with prejudiced people but actions that cause tension between the child and its natural parent(s) do not happen in a vacuum. When the original poster doesn’t voluntarily own up to how they went off in the post, I also have to question other details. Why did the birth mother unfriend the adoptive mother on Facebook? What is this adopter saying about the child’s first mother ?

“[She] is going to be completely devastated when I read her the message.” The adoptee asks – Is the adoptive mother going to read the message(s) she sent berating the original mother ? Let’s be honest, I doubt it. Also, why even read the message in the first place ? The message is a response to a conflict with the adoptive mother, not a rejection letter addressed to the adopted person.

It is unfair to the child that their original is prejudiced against trans people. It is just as, if not more, unfair to the child that the adoptive mother seems to be self-victimizing, rather than self reflecting. “Poor me, I got unfriended on Facebook ! I don’t know how I’m going to tell this child how awful her birth mother is ! I envisioned a life of lots of visits !”

This kid’s transition seems to have came as a surprise to her first mother. The fact that she is upset about a gender transition taking place COULD be coming from a a place of prejudice. (It probably is, at least to some extent.) It also COULD be coming from a place of being blindsided. One day her kid is gone, the next day her kid is a different person. The adopters “don’t even blink” when this transition happens, probably because in some ways they see it coming. Now her kid is gone and on top of that appears to be a completely different person. Why should she be expected to adjust to such a massive change so quickly? In her eyes, she lost a little boy and will never get him back now — even if she comes to accept the child’s gender identity. Maybe this kid is the first trans person her first mother has ever known and it just takes time for her to accept the child’s identity.

I am not saying any of this to rationalize or justify transphobia. I am saying that the adoptive mother needs to look at this situation contextually. To understand the first mother is a human, living in different circumstances and engaging in different social circles. To get someone to see the “progressive” side of an issue, the answer is not to berate them for not understanding things the way you do. Maybe you have been exposed to different people and ideas that her first mother hasn’t been exposed to as quickly, if at all. Maybe her first mother would’ve been more accepting of her child’s transition had the child been with her all along. Maybe not. In either case, this adoptive mother should be probably be in therapy herself, if she are not already. There is much more to this issue, I believe, than they’re willing to admit to themselves. At the very least, this is not strictly a transphobia issue.

I think it is an awful idea for this adopted person and her original mother to continue communicating through an intermediary. This has clearly rubbed her mother the wrong way, fair or unfair. Her original mother probably would not be communicating the way she’s presently communicating (even if the transphobia remains) when communicating directly with the adopted person. A hostile message sent to an intermediary in the midst of conflict is not a letter of rejection addressed to the adopted person. This adopted person deserves the ability to speak directly with her original mother and get it straight from her. Even if she receives a direct, bigoted rejection, that would bring resolution in the long run, even if it caused more short-term pain. When you get a “rejection” through intermediaries (and I put this in quotes because again, the original mother’s message was sent to the adoptive mother, not the child), there are always questions of whether the rejector would say these things to your face. Whether details are embellished to villainize or paint people in a better light. Clarity is only achieved through direct communication.

Something I Can Do

Today, I read a question in my all things adoption (which includes foster care) – I have a quick question regarding fostering. From time to time, local advocacy groups will try to find families to temporarily foster Muslim children. There’s not a ton of Muslims in our state, and most foster agencies/related organizations are Christian run and not interested in respecting a child’s religious or cultural background. Somewhere somehow, a Muslim volunteer gets involved and desperately tries to find a family to take the child in. Is it, in this situation, ethnical or morally okay for me to take the child in temporarily? I am not super familiar with the foster system, but I have the resources to care for another child temporarily and would do so only with reunification in mind. I just don’t want to cause harm.

One response led me to the organization who’s logo I am using as an image today – Michigan has a large Muslim population and we have a support organization that walks favors the process of being a foster parent AND provides reunification supports for the parents. If you can provide temporary care, and the children have been removed from their parents’ care, please offer a home that is culturally aware.

One adoptee noted – So often Muslim children are thrown into Christian homes and their beliefs aren’t respected out of ignorance or worse. The reality is foster parents are needed, that’s not going to change in the near future. Remember, the goal is foster care is reunification. You should be working with mom and dad, not against them.

Another adoptee notes – If your can fully support reunification in an informed way, you’d be an ideal placement for a Muslim child who needs to remain in their community or culture of origin. The Muslim view on adoption would be respected by you in a way it wouldn’t be by most foster parents, should the case plan change from reunification. You’d still be voluntarily interacting with a corrupt system so it wouldn’t be 100% ethical, but any children, especially Muslim children, would likely have a far better outcome being placed with you vs the other foster parents in your area.

One social worker wrote – it is ok to take the child in if you are respectful of food choices (such as no pork) and are willing to provide access to their religious preferences such as taking them to a mosque.

So I searched and found the LINK>Muslim Foster Care Association. Their impact statement reads – we strive to enable Muslim children in the foster care system to thrive, flourish and be their best as human beings, Muslims, and contributing members of society. Every year we serve over 200 Muslim children in the foster care system throughout Michigan and with the help of our generous donors, raise thousands of dollars to fund our programs. Our goal is to create innovative solutions to the challenges faced by Muslim youth in various stages of their transition.

So for anyone who wants to do something more than protest the situation in Gaza, I am happy to lend awareness to this organization. I realize that supporting this organization does NOT impact what is happening in the Middle East. This is just some people trying to make a positive difference here in the US.

A Huge Disappointment

The author of this book has completed Day 1 of a 2 Day conference on trauma. His book had previously been recommended in my all things adoption (which includes foster care) group. It is impossible to accurately convey how disappointed those who view the first day’s live event are with this man’s perspectives. I just signed up for free as there is still Day 2 to go this day and then, there are supposed to be recordings, if one misses the live event. Here is the link – The Body Keeps Score.

From the registration site –

Dr Bessel van der Kolk presents his signature presentation on treating the imprints of trauma on the body, mind, and soul.

He claims – “I’m presenting this training to serve as both a guide and an invitation—an invitation to dedicate ourselves to facing the reality of trauma, to explore how best to treat it, and to commit ourselves, as a society, to using every means we have to prevent it.”

Dr van der Kolk shows you how to apply proven methods and approaches like neurofeedback, EMDR, meditation, yoga, mindfulness, and sensory integration in your clinical practice — so you can experience the satisfaction of helping even your toughest client heal from deep-rooted trauma.

Some comments from my all things adoption group after watching Day 1 –

There were some horrific comments about foster children being dangerous and difficult and burning houses down. Not as specific cases. Foster children in general.

Of the 8 or so hours, I can probably boil the helpful info down to about 3 sentences and none of them are new.

Assumptions that all adopters are very nice and that any problems with adoption trauma must be due to the first mom drinking during pregnancy. I’m exaggerating. But not by much.

He also said that combat veterans with PTSD don’t benefit from Prozac because they’re too invested in blaming PTSD for all their problems. He also claimed that Prozac always works for everyone who isn’t a combat veteran.

Therapists are victims and powerless, that DSM is “a piece of sh*t”.

He also thinks everyone should take tango lessons and that it would solve their trauma better than therapy.

I hope people only ever access his works thru pirating and only to laugh at him and that his empire crumbles under his feet.

Let me guess he said adoption trauma isn’t real lol Most people think that children when adopted are clean slates, and our minds and bodies can just start over but that’s not even true, even for babies.

He spent AGES showing a video and talking about how traumatic it was for a non adopted child to be away from his mom for a day or two while younger sibling was being born. But oh gosh if it’s adoption, then adopters are very nice people and are absolute saints for putting up with difficult adopted children.

A lot of people are just uneducated and adoption trauma doesn’t exist to a lot of the world.

He also made a comment that assumed all foster children are correctly and justly taken from their families because they’ve all been abused by their first families.

A questioner asked should I skip reading the book ? The answer was – the book itself is great. Just not the adoption aspect, but overall.. worth a read!

His bigotry made me unwilling to financially support his business.

As an adoptee my response to him is: how f***ing dare you assume all adoptees are difficult and dangerous and all adopters are saintly and amazing for putting up with us ? How dare you, you overprivileged white man, one who feels entitled to say that colonizing wasn’t that bad and China is a miserable place to be ?

He is drunk on his own power and has no capacity for critically thinking through his bigoted views.

I have read the book. The book is not all about adoption, in fact, if I was describing the book I wouldn’t even discuss that part. It is about the bodies physiological, neurological and biological response is trauma. It is a very important way of understanding regarding why people respond they way they do. It’s been a while since I read it but I’m sure there are some generalized and probably offensive statements for adoptees but overall it’s extremely helpful in understanding how trauma effects all the multiple systems of the body.

I was told flat out by a Guardian ad Litem that my children needing glasses was due to my drug use during pregnancy. Never mind the fact that I’ve never had a drug problem, never failed a drug test and was drug tested during, before and after my pregnancy… Couldn’t be that every member of mine and my husband’s family needs glasses and sometimes children just have vision problems. It must be drug use (meant sarcastically).

Keep in mind that over 50% of psychological research cannot be replicated. (Over 50% actually according to a top scientific journal – Nature magazine.) While therapists can be beneficial, there are a lot of quacks who present as authorities in the field. Some of the most well-known people in the field can be the most problematic such that their work cannot be replicated, but they ride the coat tails of their notoriety and most people don’t know how to keep them accountable.

Just a note, that 50% number is not quite accurate and most of the psychology quacks aren’t the ones actually doing research. There have been a lot of critiques of that article since, including the kinds of studies they chose to try to replicate and the conditions under which they claimed replication failed. I’m not saying it isn’t a problem, but that article almost certainly overstated it.

I’m a PhD in psychology. We have a giant problem with public communication of our science.

Someone suggested the book – The Deepest Well: Healing the Long-Term Effects of Childhood Adversity by Nadine Burke Harris MD. From a review at NIH website – Hans Selye, a Hungarian-born physician, developed the concept of the General Adaptation Syndrome as the first neurohormonal model of physiologic stress implicating pituitary and adrenal function in the etiology of many chronic diseases, and the associated sickly appearance of those suffering. claimed the physiologic life is fundamentally a process of adaptation to the totality of one’s experience, with real health and happiness being the successful adjustment or adaptation to those ever-changing conditions. Failure to adapt to the stress burden resulted in disease and unhappiness. In 1985, Vincent Felitti, MD, Chief of Preventive Medicine at Southern California Permanente Medical Group, San Diego, added mightily to Selye’s work with his findings of the profound, destructive, multi-organ system consequences of adverse childhood experiences. Nadine Burke Harris, MD, discovered Felitti’s pioneering work later, yet immediately understood the potential power of its lessons if implemented in her pediatric practice. She describes well her newfound understanding of the pathogenesis of ACEs (adverse childhood experiences) and the excitement of potential, effective therapeutic interventions. The Deepest Well is the story of how Burke Harris transformed herself into a champion persuader of truths difficult for others to hear, and a better clinician.

Bessel van der Kolk was booted by The Trauma Center (which he helped establish) because of his issues. The Boston Globe from March 7 2018 – Allegations of employee mistreatment roil renowned Brookline trauma center.

This doesn’t surprise me in the slightest (I’ve met Bessel before and my old boss worked under him at the Boston Trauma Center when he was in charge… he went down with Me Too NOT because he’s a sexual predator, but because he’s such an a**hole that he got more or less ousted from the PTSD community). It’s really a shame because his work is SO important and good and foundational in the complex PTSD world but he’s such a horrible person it overshadows it a lot of the time. I didn’t realize his what views were re: adoption etc, but I did know his insane levels of narcissism and his general tendency to bully.

Another one says, I met him at an International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies conference as well, in 2012 or 2013, I remember him being rude, though I had no idea he had any specific views about adoption in particular.

I’m so very disappointed to hear this. I read his book and it was so very eye opening for me. His work seems so foundational to the study of the affect of trauma on people. It is so very disappointing and even more frustrating.

Speaking For And Over

Straight up – I am NOT adopted but both of my parents were and each of my sisters gave up a child to adoption, who I have been blessed to reconnect with in their late teen/early adulthood. I have learned the most from belonging in an all things adoption group where the voices of adoptees are privileged over all others, though there are original parents and adoptive parents (including those hoping to adopt and foster parents) and the rare oddball like me who belongs but doesn’t fit any of the usual categories. Now that I have dealt with my place in the adoption triad as it is often called, I’ll go on into today’s blog topic.

An adoptee writes – There needs to be a name for the bigotry of attacking, marginalizing and discrediting the voices of adoptees, donor conceived folk and former foster youth. I’m exhausted by the relentless online barrage from people who think they can speak for or over us based on the nature of our birth and/or conception and call us angry, broken and other hateful tropes.

This may shock you that anyone would be so inconsiderate and thoughtless but I will assure you, people are often clueless, especially about adoption. In fact, I was clueless before I entered this group about 3 years ago. I grew up thinking adoption was the most natural things in the world. Of course I would, given my family background. As a child, I thought my parents were orphans. They died knowing very little beyond some vague name related to their origins and their original parents. After they died, through effort, persistence and a lot of lucky, within a year I knew who all 4 of my original grandparents were. My parents were adopted in the dark ages of the Great Depression, sealed adoption records, changed identities on their original birth certificates and in some cases even their actual birthdate was changed.

Now, on to some of the comments regarding my adoptee perspective above . . .

One commenter noted this truth – Many of the people who push adoption are anti-abortion but I call them “forced birthers”. Forced birthers want their baby mills to produce. To which another responded – Pregnancy and birth are expensive and a lot of women turn to abortion because they don’t want a child and its the most financially responsible choice for themselves. Another one noted – I had a bunch of particularly bigoted recipient parents call me prolife because I said donor conceived people had rights. But saying adoptees, donor conceived people and former foster youth have rights is not the same as saying embryos have rights and I’m absolutely pro choice. So frustrating how things are twisted.

Someone else offered this interesting exercise – It helps to do train of thought free association… anti-adoption-truth-sayer, hard truth silencer, kidnapper sympathizer, rainbows and unicorns narrative, adoptee-phobe, foster youth-phobe, trauma denier, child trafficking supporter, baby objectifier, baby snatcher, willful ignorance, privilege/entitlement, keeping one’s blinders on, cognitive dissonance, rose-colored glasses, saviorist, virtue signaling, oppressor, crush, gag, hush, censor, suppress, repress, hide, mask, bully, harass, gaslighting… Really I think gaslighting is what is going on…Definition – Using denial, misdirection, contradiction, and misinformation; gaslighting involves attempts to destabilize the victim and delegitimize the victim’s beliefs. As I continue to think about this… it’s basically “separation trauma gaslighting”…

One noted that she hates the term ‘recipient parent’ because she doesn’t like the idea of adoptees being viewed as gifts. She suggests an “individual who feels entitled to another person’s child”.

And someone else acknowledged it is conception discrimination.

Yet another said – What is a term that can be used to describe genetic identity seekers? Or people who don’t like to be separated from their genetic family? I think we need a word that encapsulates who we are. Then we could add an anti-, -ism, or -phobia for the opposite side of that concept.

Another one pointed out – Home wrecker is such a strong emotive world, and everyone immediately knows what it means. Maybe Family wreckers or some other similar term?

One woman speaking for her own interests says, I like using words like advocate and mentor to describe myself at this point in my life. I advocate for family safety and preservation and transparency and accountability within the human services systems in our country. I have also been thinking of what to call this movement for adoptee dignity, and the advocates who are tirelessly speaking out about these issues. And your blogger likes this perspective because that is what I think of in regard to myself and what I do in this blog.

An adoptee who has encountered these behaviors says, When someone comments that I should be grateful, sometimes I will tell them to check their privilege. I also like obscurantist, which means deliberately preventing the facts or full details of something from becoming known.

Another noted that this would be a form of childism. The child is objectified, and there is a hierarchy of value placed on them by adults based on many factors including: the circumstances of their birth, how they came to be placed with their non-biological family, how well-treated and accepted they are by the family they were raised by, whether or not they aged out of the foster care system, etc. Childism may be too broad and not specific enough.

And maybe this is the bottom line – I think the most important thing we can do is change the conversation. I think we just need to keep going. Even when our comments get erased or we get thrown out of the conversation just keep commenting. If enough of us keep commenting on the posts with our view I think we can change the conversation.

And on the speaking out side of things, one wrote – I like using terms like fragility and privilege to get people’s attention and get them talking about why they have the views they have so I can knock them down a peg or two. I keep links handy, peer-reviewed studies/articles, etc. and drop them in when relevant.