Is It A Crisis ?

I used to worry about over-population. Five decades ago, Paul Ehrlich’s book The Population Bomb sparked global fears of “mass starvation” on a “dying planet” because of overpopulation.

One doesn’t hear about that very much anymore. I have two son that are early 20s. The older one at 23 is certain he will never have children. The younger one doesn’t talk about it at all. My husband was already 36 when we married, I was 34 and had previously been married and have a daughter by that marriage who was born in 1973. I didn’t foresee having 2 more children at 47 and 50 years of age but I have no regrets that we did this. When I discovered that it would be near impossible for me to conceive naturally at such an advanced age, I lamented that now that my husband was ready, I was too old to honor his desire to be a father. My OB said – “there is a way” – and we took “the way” he suggested and ran with it. We were incredibly lucky throughout the process overall.

So, what kind of crisis is this ? A baby crisis, a population crisis, a fertility crisis, a demographic crisis, an ageing crisis and/or an economic crisis ? There are many possible explanations and each of those kinds of crisis is some part of what some people think is a problematic issue for people globally going into the future. I don’t personally know if this really is “a problem” or not. It simply is the current reality. Thankfully, medical science does have some tools that did not exist in the past for those of us who remarry and those who wake up older one day and fear they missed their only opportunity to become parents.

It is also true that when women are more educated, more liberated, and more able to access contraception, they start having fewer children. An Institute For Health Metrics and Evaluation study noted that low-income places with higher fertility rates – such as sub-Sarahan Africa, which is set to contribute over half the world’s births by 2100 – will need better access to contraceptives and female education. This why, in many less developed countries, the effort is to educate more girls and provide them with birth control access, which also means that they don’t have to marry young and have lots of babies, if that isn’t their interest in reaching maturity.

The truth is that government really can’t do much to change this trajectory (and personally, I don’t know that government needs to). Pro-natal policies, such as free childcare, better parental care leave, financial incentives and employment rights, won’t boost fertility rates up to replacement levels. The 70s dip in having babies was largely thanks to the birth control pill, which also contributed to fewer teen pregnancies. That is generally considered a good thing that leads to fewer babies given up for adoption. Other factors included big social changes around gender equality, with women increasingly educated, working and with access to no-fault divorce. I certainly made use of no-fault divorce back in the mid-70s and was on birth control throughout my child-bearing years. I also started being employed while still in high school.

Jennifer Sciubba, author of 8 Billion and Counting: How Sex, Death and Migration Shape Our World, notes that following the “success sequence” – getting an education, a great job, a home, some savings – means pushing back having children. And once people have more money, they also want to have other things in their lives that kids might detract from – going out for a nice meal, taking a holiday, a full night’s sleep.

Having more than two can seem unimaginably intensive, hard and expensive, she says, but it’s never just the money. What about family and community support ? Religion ? The “little logistics” like needing a new car to fit enough car seats ? blogger’s note – Yeah, this explains a lot about that leaning into Christian Nationalism by conservatives and their Project 2025. Through east Asia, Sciubba says, the idea is spreading that “marriage is no longer required to have a good life. It might actually stifle your life because of gender relations within the household”.

Thanks to this article in The Guardian for many of today’s concepts and details. You can read the full article at this LINK>Birthrates are plummeting worldwide. Can governments turn the tide? by Tory Shepherd

Bridges

A woman writes – fostering is something I’ve thought about a lot lately. Fostering to help with reunification and supporting families and siblings, not fostering to adopt. If I was to foster, I’d have one family/child at a time. So either siblings or an only child. I’m experienced with mental health and trauma, as well as being fostered myself. I’d also love to foster older kids or teenagers, either long term or short term, however I can help the young person. I just want to be a safe space that I never had.

A foster parent suggests the LINK>Bridges program in Ohio as an example.

Here’s how Ohio works: It starts at emancipation and ends at age 21. An adult can provide “supportive in-home” care. You aren’t the parent or the guardian because the young person is legally an adult and fully autonomous. They have a liaison with the program who works their plan with them – budgeting, education, jobs, etc. The liaison part is basic, so with a good relationship in place, you can really help a young adult prepare to be fully independent! It’s hard to adult ! In Ohio, you get a stipend for room and board, so you’ll provide meals and snacks, a private room and all utilities. It’s like a step toward an apartment. I think the program has great potential but it’s underutilized and maybe not quite enough support for the former foster care youth. But with the added help of the in-home support person, it can be life changing for a young person !

Some Thoughts On Better Options

An adoptee in my all things adoption group asks – I am always seeing posts on how adoption is wrong, or it should not happen. But what is the better option ? I definitely think with biological parents it is best, but that is not always the option. So what would be the solution to that ? Family ? But what if that is not a good option ? No kid should be in an orphanage or a state group home. I don’t think foster care homes are good either. I had 7 aunts/uncles all put in homes (I was able to find them all and put them back together, connecting wise) but in the homes, not one had a good story. Knowing what we have all been through, what would be the best situation for kids that don’t have any biological family/parents ? As adults that have been through this, how do we try to change this or make it better for the younger ones who are going to be born into this ?

Some responses –

One adoptee answers – by creating a society where adoption is not necessary. By having access to healthcare, education and supporting families by having paid family leave, child care, affordable housing & medical. When these things are met – then let’s see how many children need to be adopted.

I will leave the accusations in the comment below, which turned out to be unfair, yet the points made were valid (the woman who asked was a adoptee and did not adopt her child, though she adds, “I have been a guardian to kids that have needed it, some through the courts, some just stayed with us when their situation needed a place.”) – Clearly YOUR kid has a natural mom, so they HAD birth parents and family. Why aren’t they with you ? Was it financial ? Then, the answer would be more financial support, perhaps even a Universal Basic Income (blogger’s note – I am in favor of that one), free daycare, etc. If the parents were killed or in jail or otherwise … there are (*)usually – Do not “not all” me – (*) extended family, aunts, uncles, grandparents, cousins … they can be a guardian for the child.

From a kinship placement/guardian – If adopted, no changing the birth certificates. Instead of changing birth certificates issue a document of adoption to show who can make legal decisions for the child. Change names only when absolutely necessary (I can’t think of an instance where it would be necessary, but there may be some reasonable situation). That’s a start.

From another adoptee – If you are ever going to adopt (I don’t see why adoption is so necessary when we can do guardianship and it’s perfectly normal) YOU don’t get the luxury of saying that baby is part of your family, period. He or she HAS A WHOLE OTHER family and they can’t be erased and never will. The child can still be in your family and you can love them and treat them like your own! but they HAVE a family and always will. I feel like anybody who is even considering adoption should have their doors open for that baby’s family and/or culture. That’s just how it is. That’s how it’s supposed to be. They need to know where they come from.

She goes on to add – After having my son, I realized there are way more mothers than I had thought who all miss their babies. I realized that adoption was not for the natural mother’s benefit. Look at it like this, people say the baby won’t remember but when you think about it – actually think about it – of course they do, on some level. For example, blind people rely completely on their smell, scents, textures and noises. All people actually do. People with seeing eyes rely heavily on sight. When a baby is inside their mother, they recognize everything ! Her voice. The way her voice vibrates, her sound, her touch, her smell, all of that. And when you take a newborn baby who was just born away from all of that, it causes a trauma that can never be fixed. They may not remember the pictures in their head but their muscle memory will always have that piece that is missing. People try to glorify adoption because they haven’t been taught what it actually is or what it does to people. Also nobody wants to accept this hard truth.

The adoptee who started this said – I completely agree. My mom died when I was 3 days old. My dad died when I was 9 months old. My dad used to wear Old Spice. Well, my first and second adoptive fathers wore it when I meet them. Smell cannot be erased. (blogger’s note – that aftershave must have been very common, my dad used it too – very distinctive smell).

When It’s Not Something You Did

Today’s story –

I have been dealing with the Division of Children and Family Services for a year now. I have never messed up and have done everything – times 10 – to show them how much I love my girls. I have no issues on any of my drug screens, which every single day, I have been sober for going on 7 years now, so that’s not a problem. I still have never missed a call. I have gone to therapy every week this whole year.

It’s one year ago on the 26th of October, when they just showed up and took my kids. I have done eight courses, instead of the one that they recommended. I did that 1+7 extra that I paid for. My mental and parental evaluations came back completely normal and he didn’t have any recommendations.

An ex-boyfriend called me in October, which is like three weeks ago, from a county jail. Now they have recordings and are saying that they’re requesting terminating of reunification. I’ve never messed up – not once. I have been stable for years and years. All I do is live and breathe my children. I’ve tried everything in my ability to get them back and now, this is not even in my parent plan. There’s no protective order. I have never been told that I couldn’t talk to him. Because I answered my phone, they now have a recording of me talking to him. Nothing bad was said. But they’re requesting the judge terminate my reunification. I’m just petrified. What do I do? I have been asking for prayers and I’ve reached out to other agencies here in Utah. Please send any advice you may have.

One responded with this – Who is your judge? I am in Utah as well. Be prepared for them to send the kids home at any moment. Once you hit that 15 month mark they are either going home immediately or they will be adopted.

Personally, I’m cheering for this mom to get her kids back !!

Profiles In Adoption

National Council for Adoption recently conducted this survey of adoptive parents. They are supposed to be surveying birth parents and adoptees next, but it’s clear from this survey who has the loudest voices and is viewed as most important when it comes to adoption. This organization is the face of what can be viewed as the adoption machine in this country.

You can read the 48 page report, based on the results of this survey, at their website. Look for the “Read the Report” link in the orange bubble here –>National Council for Adoption. The paragraphs below come from the report’s highlights, as excerpted on page 3, with some additions from my current perspectives.

Adoptive parents tend to be very highly educated and have relatively high household incomes. According to their adoptive parents, adoptees have very positive educational outcomes. Some have an Individualized Educational Plan (IEP). This is a plan or program developed to ensure that a child who has a disability identified under the law and is attending an elementary or secondary educational institution receives specialized instruction and related services. Some have a 504 Plan. This is intended to help kids who need more support in public school. This plan’s name does not clearly identify its purpose. A 504 plan makes changes at the school level, so that the child can learn. Some people mix up 504 plans with special education. They’re not the same. Special education is special instruction for kids who need more than standard teaching. A 504 plan, on the other hand, is about making sure the classroom fits how your child learns.

Anyone who has been at all involved in broad based adoption related communities (that is one that includes adoptees, adoptive parents and birth parents) would not be surprised to learn that due to the trauma involved in adoption generally, many adoptees will receive an impact diagnosis of some sort during their childhood. They will also therefore require therapeutic services after an adoption has been finalized.

The current trend in our modern times is that, eventually, adoptees will regain some contact with their original birth parents, siblings and other extended genetic family. In the best circumstances, the adoptive parents encourage and facilitate these reunions.

Also related to modern trends is that adoptive parents with a child of a different race/ethnicity will seek activities in which the child and their adoptive parents can participate so that they may become familiar with cultural aspects related to their biology and/or country of birth.

Today’s blog is simply to make your aware of this survey and resource for information you may not find through other avenues.

Youth Villages

My husband called my attention to an article at NPR.org – “18 can mean an abrupt exit from foster care. For some, it’s no longer a solo journey.” I already knew somewhat about aging out of foster care and the effects of that.

What attracted my attention was this – Helping young people see that they can have a stable future is the goal of the LifeSet program. Developed in 1999 by the Memphis nonprofit Youth Villages, it is being used today in 18 states and Washington, DC. I appreciate this from their Mission and Values statements – “When at all possible, children belong with their families. We help families provide the support and structure that all children need.”

Also this – We develop innovative programs that serve children and families facing the most challenging circumstances. Our entrepreneurial spirit leads us to test the limits of existing services and create new opportunities. We provide care and treatment for children in an open, safe environment. We ensure that young people are physically and emotionally safe. We help children and families develop skills to live successfully by focusing on areas that have a long-term impact on the family.

LifeSet puts transition-age youth in the driver’s seat of their lives with a trained specialist by their side to help them identify and achieve goals. It is is an individualized, evidence-informed community-based program that is highly intensive. LifeSet specialists meet with participants face to face at least once each week. They text, email and call young people regularly throughout the week, when needed. Specialists stabilize even the toughest situations and help young people build healthy relationships, obtain safe housing, education and employment. LifeSet is one of the nation’s first — and now one of the largest — evidence-informed programs helping young people who age out of foster care. More than 20,000 young people have helped through LifeSet across the country since the program began in 1999.

When Adoptions Fail

Joyce Maynard with the two Ethiopian daughters,
ages 6 and 11, she adopted in 2010.

Famous moms like Angelina Jolie, Madonna and Charlize Theron make adoption look easy. In as many as a quarter of adoptions of teens, and a significant number of younger child adoptions, the parents ultimately decide they don’t want to keep the child. But what happens, and who’s to blame, when an adoption doesn’t work?

Writer Joyce Maynard revealed on her blog that that she’d given up her two daughters, adopted from Ethiopia in 2010 at the ages of 6 and 11, because she was “not able to give them what they needed.”

Other cases have been more outrageous, like the Tennessee woman who put her 7-year-old adopted son on a plane bound for Russia in 2010 when things went south. Recently she was ordered by a judge to pay $150,000 in child support.

In the adoption world, failed adoptions are called “disruptions.” But while a disruption may seem stone-hearted from the outside, these final anguished acts are complex, soul-crushing for all concerned and perhaps more common than you’d think.

On her blog, Maynard wrote that giving up her two adoptive daughters was “the hardest thing I ever lived through” but goes on to say it was absolutely the right decision for her – and the children. Yes, she has been severely judged by some people. She says, however, that “I have also received well over a hundred letters of a very different sort from other adoptive parents – those who have disrupted and those who did not, but struggle greatly. The main thing those letters tell me is that many, many adoptive parents (and children) struggle in ways we seldom hear about.”

Statistics on disruption vary. A 2010 study of US adoptions found that between 6 percent and 11 percent of all adoptions are disrupted before they are finalized. For children older than 3, disruption rates range between 10 percent to 16 percent; for teens, it may be as high as 24 percent, or one in four adoptions. Adoptions can take anywhere from a few months to a couple of years to become final – and that window is when most disruptions occur, experts say. While some families do choose to end an adoption after that, those cases are rarer (ranging from 1 percent to 7 percent, according to the study).

Disruption rarely occurs with infants. It occurs more often (anywhere from 5% to 20%) with the older children. That is because the complexities of parenting a child who already has life experiences and certain behaviors is more complicated. When a child is rejected and traumatized early in their development, it changes the way they function and respond to people. Older children – especially ones who have been neglected, rejected and abused will often distance themselves from other people and develop a hard-shell.

According to the study, the older the child is at the time of adoption, the more likely the adoption will fail. Children with special needs also face greater risk of disruption, particularly those who demonstrate emotional difficulties and sexual acting out. Certain types of parents are more likely to end up giving up adopted children. These include younger adoptive parents, inexperienced parents, and parents who both work outside the home. Wealthier parents and more educated mothers are also more likely to disrupt an adoption. There is less tolerance, if someone’s more educated or they make more money,

What happens when a parent decides to give up an adopted child?

If a child has been adopted legally, then it’s like giving up a birth child. The parents who adopted the child have to find a home for the child or some other resources. That could be the adoption agency or the state (who would most likely put the child in foster care). If the parents decide to end the process before the child has been legally adopted, the child would then likely go into foster care. International adoptions follow the same rules, except the adoption agency usually notifies the country that the adoption has failed, however, returning the child to their country of origin is never an option.

If an adoption fails before the parents become the formal, legal parents of the child, the courts usually aren’t involved. If the adoption has been finalized, however, then the parents must go to court. A dissolution – sometimes referred to as an annulment – takes place after a child is formally adopted by a set of parents. The law treats these situations very seriously. States vary on their handling of these situations. Generally speaking, a parent will petition the court where they adopted the child asking to un-adopt them.

Disruption is never easy for the child. It takes an extreme toll and can cause lifelong issues of distrust, depression, anxiety, extreme control issues and very rigid behavior. They don’t trust anyone; they have very low self-esteem. They’ll push away teachers and friends and potential parents and if you put them in another placement and they have to reattach again and then if they lose that placement, with each disruption gets tougher and tougher.

If you are a hopeful adoptive parent – be careful what you wish for. Some adoptive parents believe are will be able to help a child and sometimes, to some adoptive parents, this means changing the child. They believe that if they just love the child enough . . . Truth is, it takes so much more than love. It may be harder to handle than you ever thought possible in your fantasy dreams.

Inspired and borrowed from Today’s – It Takes More Than Love.

Choosing Not To Have Children

More than one friend in my age group has told me that their grown children do not intend to have children which will mean no grandchildren for my friends. Even my oldest son has expressed some doubts that he will. What is going on here ? Very real concerns about how climate change will make the future very difficult for today’s children and their children and much sooner than I had previously heard – like by like by 2050.

Because I think daily about issues at least tangential to adoption, that is the first place my thought goes and in an article in The Guardian titled Should I have children? Weighing parenthood amid the climate crisis by Megan Mayhew Bergman I read – Ellie at age 23 wrote the author, “While I don’t believe the changes we’re seeing have to signify end-of-days, I do believe there are incredibly thoughtful solutions at hand which – if we can pull them off – would bring about a world I’d very much want to have children in. But I also think my generation may have found itself at a unique moment in which more people isn’t the answer, and alternatives like adoption represent more eco- and ultimately, human-conscious choices.” And to be certain, more than 100,000 children have been born in refugee camps in Myanmar and in Bangladesh’s Cox’s Bazar, the largest refugee settlement in the world, which is vulnerable to extreme flooding and landslides.

Recent polling reveals that four in 10 young people are “hesitant to have children as a result of the climate crisis” and “fear that governments are doing too little to prevent climate catastrophe”.

An article in Vanity Fair last year by Tatiana Schlossberg titled How Should a Climate Change Reporter Think About Having Children? She goes on to say – Reproduction is a fundamental feature of life on earth, but a morally fraught decision for anyone who has the choice. And there’s not even a right answer. She mentions a drive through a scenic passage in Colorado but that “I felt so angry at our species. Angry because we are willing to destroy all of this and to do so knowingly, because we seem to value no life other than human life, and I’m not even sure how much we value that.” I would have to agree with that last bit somewhat.

She goes on to share – when you are a married straight woman in your 20s and everyone wants to know when you’re going to have a kid, it turns out to be almost impossible to avoid thinking about the future.

In answer to that, she shares – There are two familiar arguments about not having a kid when it comes to climate change. The first one is that it is unkind and irresponsible to bring a child into a world whose future is uncertain at best and apocalyptic at worst. The second one is that, as a privileged, white American with a sizable carbon footprint, any child of mine would be another person with a similar environmental impact, both in terms of greenhouse gas emissions and resource consumption. According to those two lines of thinking, having a child is unethical, both because of what it would do to the child and because of what that child would do to the world.

Realistically, she goes on to admit – As both a reporter and a person in her child-bearing years, I don’t know what the right thing to do is—and I don’t think that there is a right thing to do. I find myself feeling much the same way. I do believe humanity will continue to exist and on some level I feel that raising a reasonable number (like 1 or 2) of children to be highly aware and ethical will be valuable to whatever the future will bring.

She also acknowledges that – not having a child is not the same as becoming a vegetarian or buying an electric car. Having a child, becoming a parent, can be a defining feature of life on earth—the reproduction of aspen trees is not necessarily parenthood, but it is part of the same drive to pass on genetic material; it is hardwired in us, and we share it with all other lifeforms.

A dear friend of mine is involved with Project Drawdown, a climate-advocacy organization, that has ranked the 100 most effective solutions to climate change, and found that together, education and family planning for women and girls is the second-most effective way to reduce emissions (after reducing food waste, which includes shifting to a plant-rich diet and preventing deforestation), because when women are more educated, they generally have fewer children, and also add to the economic and cultural success of their communities.

The Vanity Fair article author notes – The birth rate in the United States and much of the developed world is declining. When people express concern to me about there being too many people on earth, they don’t seem to be saying there are too many Americans; they are, knowingly or not, talking about limiting the growing and increasingly young nonwhite populations in the global south. Throughout American history, anxiety about population is almost always linked to race or national origin, so what I always want to say in response is, “Who are you talking about when you ask me that question?”

I do feel lucky to have the female freedoms I do because of the time in which I have lived. I acknowledge that I am indebted to the work of so many women which has given me choice (and currently, that is highly under threat). Support for reproductive freedom is a core part of my own political identity, as is support for climate action as an environmentalist. We try to raise our sons to value the same things as well.

I will also admit to a certain degree of arrogance in that kind of thinking. That my having kids is okay because my kids will be a good persons and who knows ? One of them might solve climate change. OK, so the latter idea is probably not the most likely outcome, nor is it the most powerful argument in defense of my having children. Any person could say as much. True, I di think that my children are special, geniuses, perfect in their own ways, but I also realize that my children doesn’t necessarily have a greater right to be born than anyone else’s. I am sad for the youth of today. Even back around the 2000s when my husband and I decided to have these two boys, the concern was not as urgent as it seems today (and I say seems because it should have been more urgent then and even in the early 1970s when I had my daughter).

Mommie Dearest

Just the words, “Mommie Dearest” makes me want to cringe. I was aware that Crawford had adopted her children from Georgia Tann. Actually, I had come across the story of the younger siblings, twin girls, while doing my research about Georgia Tann. They have a more positive perception of Crawford. However, I know that one child may be a problem for the parents, while another child won’t be. There are defiant and compliant children and certainly, the complaint ones are easier to parent. Not that I am judging Christina as a problem child but it is clear that she had problems with her mother.

I don’t doubt that she suffered abuse. I’ve read the accounts of too many adoptees in my all things adoption group to doubt anyone’s claim. My first reminder of Christina’s memoir was an article in which the writer describes going to see the film version (about 40 years after its release) and it being found hilarious by many in the audience, that it had become a bit “camp”. Since I really didn’t know the definition, I googled it. Camp is an aesthetic style and sensibility that regards something as appealing because of its bad taste and ironic value. Somehow a movie about child abuse just doesn’t seem like the same kind of cult classic as The Rocky Horror Picture Show from my own perspective.

Christina was 80 years old last year. Her memoir came out in 1978 but she had written a musical based on it around the time of her latest birthday. It had a run at Birdland, the renowned New York jazz venue. She was happy about it. “It sold out, it was fabulous,” she says, looking glamorous and spry, before issuing what has become a standard warning: “The musical had absolutely nothing to do with the movie. I want to put that in big capital letters.”

The movie she is referring to (and the one I mentioned above) is the 1981 adaptation of Christina’s memoir that starred Faye Dunaway as Joan Crawford, Christina’s adoptive mother, whose abuses, soberly detailed in the book, were turned by the movie into high camp. As chronicled in Mommie Dearest, Crawford slapped, kicked, punched and tried to strangle her daughter, while subjecting her to a severe schedule of cleaning and other household chores, driven by the movie star’s alcoholism and who knows what else.

The publication of Mommie Dearest, perhaps the first memoir ever to document child abuse from the child’s point of view, changed the landscape of victim representation and was an early precursor to today’s more robust protection of victims’ rights. Generally speaking, we don’t recognize the long-term psychological damage that is inflicted on people who are abused, neglected and trafficked. It is hard for people to understand that what happened 20 years ago is creating behavior patterns today.

Being sent to boarding school at the age of 10 was a turning point for her. She understood that the rules she grew up under weren’t normal. She tried to build a degree of self-esteem after years of being told by her mother that she was useless. Education was the path forward for her.

“Fear is the water that abused children swim in,” Christina says. “Because you don’t know what’s going to happen and your life is so chaotic. But on the other side of the equation, it’s fear from people who are afraid to speak up. Fear that they’re going to lose their job or that people are going to say something bad about them. If you were to ask me about one thing that embraces all of us, it’s the constant fear.” The fear doesn’t go away when the abuser dies. Christina says, “Because it’s internal.”

After a period of estrangement in the latter years of her mother’s life, she attempted a reconciliation. It turned out not to have been possible. Christina says of Crawford that at that point in their lives, “She was an alcoholic. She was ill. She was drug-addicted. And I think she just wasn’t playing with a full deck. I completely lost context – not contact, but context with her, because I wasn’t physically present. Then she died.”

Christina and her younger brother Christopher were cut out of Crawford’s will, for what was cited as “reasons which are well known to them.” Christina was so furious she went straight to her desk and started writing down everything that had happened in her childhood. Her two younger siblings disputed the book. Different people in the family experience the parenting situation in different ways. Because the parenting situation is different towards them, they may have trouble believing how awful it was for a sibling.

Credit for much of this blog goes to Emma Brockes for her June 25 2019 article about Christina in The Guardian. Though I hesitate to add this movie trailer, I will for full diligence to this blog.

It’s A Fundamental Human Right

I certainly understand the need to know. I believe one of the purposes that I came into this lifetime was to heal some missing family history. I believe because I was aligned with my dharma, doors opened and answers revealed themselves. That black hole void beyond my parents became whole with ancestors stretching way back and into Denmark and Scotland as well as the English and Irish.

I believe in the principle that it’s a fundamental human right to know one’s genetic identity. I remember once talking to a woman who was trying to understand why it mattered that both of my parents were adopted if they had a good life. As I tried to explain it to her, she suddenly understood. She took her own genetic ancestry for granted because she knew that if she had any reason to want to know, she could discover all the details.

Not so for many adoptees with sealed and closed records (which was the case with my parents adoptions) and not so for donor conceived people whose egg or sperm donors chose to remain anonymous – many doing it for the money – and walking away from the fact that a real living and breathing human being exists because of a choice they made. Today, inexpensive DNA testing has unlocked the truth behind many family secrets. Some learn one (or both) of the parents who raised them are not their genetic parent from a DNA test. A family friend might tell a person mourning the death of their dad at his funeral, that their father suffered from infertility and their parents used a sperm donor to conceive them.

These types of revelations can be earth shattering for some people. I’ve know of someone recently who was thrown that kind of loop. The process of coping with such a revelation is daunting and life-changing regardless. Even for my own self, learning my grandparents stories has changed my perspectives in ways I didn’t expect, when I first began the search into my own cultural and genetic origins.

There is a term for this – misattributed parentage experience (MPE). It has to do with the fact that you did not grow up knowing your genetic parent. That word – experience – best describes the long-term effects. It is not an “event,” a one-time occurrence. The ramifications of MPE last a lifetime to some degree. I know how it feels, trying to get to know people, who have decades of life experience that I was not present for or even aware of. It is not possible to recover that loss. One can only go forward with trying to develop a forward relationship and whatever gems of the past make themselves known are a gift.

There are 3 primary communities with MPE in their personal histories.

[1] Non-paternity event (NPE): those conceived from an extramarital affair, tryst, rape or assault, or other circumstance

[2] Assisted conception: those conceived from donor conception (DC), sperm donation, egg donation, embryo donation, or surrogacy

[3] Adoption: those whose adoption was hidden, orphans, individuals who’ve been in foster care or are late discovery adoptees (LDA), etc.

There are also 3 primary topics for raising awareness and developing reform efforts – education, mental health and legislation. Right To Know is an organization active on all of these fronts and issues. They are advocates for people whose genetic parent(s) is not their supportive or legal parent(s). They work to promote a better understanding of the complex intersection of genetic information, identity, and family dynamics in society at large.