Not Giving Her Up

Isabel and Lucy

In The Light Between Oceans, eventually truth and one’s conscience force a fierce mother to give up the child which isn’t actually hers. This sometimes happens in adoptions when the biological genetic parent decides they are not going to surrender their child to others to raise.

The story is a study in consequences. Every action begets a reaction. Every decision has its consequences, some unintended, but which have the capacity to cause the loss of happiness for the people involved. A lighthouse keeper and his wife discover a baby in a small boat alongside the child’s dead father. Isabel, his wife, has suffered through two miscarriages. The baby is like a gift from the sea and what the woman needs to heal the grief of her infertility. So, of course when the baby girl washes ashore in a small boat, Isabel adopts the infant as her own. Though truth be told, even though he loves his wife dearly, the husband has misgivings from the beginning, which will eventually force him to do the right thing by the woman who’s child the little girl actually is.

The movie is all about love, and the various forms of love; that between a husband and his wife, and that of a mother for her child (whether or not biological). The lighthouse keeper knows that he is required by law to report the discovery of the dead man and baby. However, his wife fears that the baby will be sent to an orphanage. She persuades her husband to pass the baby off as their own daughter, and though reluctant, he agrees out of the love he has for her and concern for the pain she suffers. He buries the baby’s father on the island and the couple names the infant girl Lucy.

When the man sees a woman kneeling in front of a grave bearing the names of her husband and infant daughter who were lost at sea, the date on the memorial stone matches the date that they found the baby girl. This causes him to realize that Lucy is likely the woman’s biological daughter. He writes anonymously to that woman to tell her that her husband is dead but that her infant daughter is safe, loved and well cared for.

This woman’s husband was German and she had married him shortly after the end of World War I. That marriage had therefore been controversial in their local community. When her husband is accosted in the street by a drunken crowd, he then jumped into a rowboat and fled with his baby daughter. In the boat with the baby was a unique silver rattle. Tormented by his conscience, he sends the child’s mother the rattle anonymously as proof that the baby actually is her lost child. Ultimately, this action leads to the lighthouse keeper’s arrest. His wife, Isabel, is angry that he is willing to give Lucy away after she has lived with them for several years.

After the little girl is returned to her biological family, she  runs away in an effort to return to the lighthouse and her “real parents.” She is found and taken back to her biological mother. The child’s original name was Grace and after she has begun to finally bond with her biological mother and maternal grandfather, they agree to call her “Lucy Grace” as a compromise with the little girl’s demands. At the end, though Isabel has passed away, the now 27-year-old woman finds the lighthouse keeper who had maintained the “no contact” ruling handed down for 18 years. Before her death, Isabel had written a letter to Lucy, in case she ever sought contact with the couple on her own. After reading it, the emotional young woman thanks the only father she knew for the first four years of her life, for rescuing and raising her on the lighthouse island.

The story reminded me of my cousin. She spent several years being raised by her (our) grandmother. It was traumatic for her to be wrest away by her biological mother’s return. She resented her aunt who was able to remain with the grandmother, when she was forced to leave someone she dearly loved.

Most of the time, when biological parents demand the return of a baby they had previously given up for adoption, the child has not had several years to bond with someone else. When that does happen, it can be very difficult for a child to give up the “fantasy” of the only parents that child has ever known. This happens rarely but on occasion, especially in the case of a father who did not originally consent to the adoption but is later given custody by a court of law.

The movie trailer –

Marginalizing Adoptee Voices

This meme by a PRO-adoption group is meant to diminish the reality of adoptees by suggesting their lives could have been worse.  Maybe their lives could have been worse but that does not mean they have to be grateful for what they lost.

This is an apples to oranges comparison –  like saying the kid with the broken legs at the hospital can’t complain because the kid next door has cancer.  We can be grateful things aren’t worse for us but that does not mean we are grateful for the wounds we suffer either.

Its not a competition. They are two separate, traumatic situations. Comparing unlike situations does not serve either of them.

The person who originally posted this meme is an adoptive parent who is attempting to co-opt the adoptee experience by starting a propaganda campaign in support of adoption.  You would NOT believe how MANY adoption related groups are listed at Facebook.  This group Adoption & Samfund Ungdom is Danish (I am 25%).

Here is a blurb in English from their page –

“Finally a Facebook page on adoptees who are glad they are adopted. I am thankful to God for all the good things I have in my life, including simple things like food, clothes, shelter and good health and I teach my adoptive children to be thankful to God (NOT thankful to me) for these too. I am happy there are many adoptees who are quite normal unlike the crazy businessman Arun Dohle who makes huge money out of adoptees.”

I would wish to note here that Arun Dohle was adopted by a German couple from an Indian orphanage.  Like many adoptees, he started to search for his roots in his late teens. The Indian orphanage did not want to provide access to his file. Arun addressed his issue through the Indian Courts.  It took him 17 years to finally obtain access to the desired information.  It should NOT have to be so hard.

My own mom tried to get her adoption file from the state of Tennessee and was rejected in the early 1990s.  I finally received her full file in 2017 after her death (not that she had to die to get this – she was never informed that the law in Tennessee was changed in the late 1990s that would have allowed her to receive it – more the tragedy really).

I simply want to make this clear.  An adoptee can be grateful for their blessings and still have deep traumatic wounds from the realities of their adoption.  I seriously have a problem with making adoption about God, even though I have a deep spirituality that connects me to my own creator.