Coercive Trickery

Kim Rossler with baby Elliott

I stumbled on this story. It isn’t new and I am unable to find out any current status. It is a cautionary tale for any expectant mother who is conflicted about giving up her baby for adoption or choosing to parent. Rather than go over all the details of this case (which sadly is common to many other such cases), I leave you with a few links to read more if you are interested in it.

Between 2015 and 2019, the story did garner some very public and at times controversial reporting (depending upon which side of the adoption issues you find yourself leaning into). I did see that the Huffington Post had a two-part article by Mirah Riben. LINK>Part 1 was published July 7, 2015 (Rossler gave birth on May 28, 2015 in Mobile County, Alabama). It was followed by LINK>Part II. At three weeks old, an Alabama sheriff removed the baby from his mother, while she was breastfeeding him.

It is the story about what can happen when a predatory adoption agency and an intent to adopt woman get together to derail a decision to parent by a woman who was previously considering giving her baby up for adoption but changed her mind.

LovingFamilies on WordPress published LINK>Update Baby Elliott Case. I also did find that LINK>in 2019, the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that a Facebook page go back online. I did try to locate it but did not find that it went back up.

This is NOT how adoption is supposed to work.

Sometimes Reunification Fails

Today, I read this from a foster parent – the foster children in our home are almost 3, 4.5, and 6.5. They’ve been with us almost 2 years, a decision to terminate parental rights was made yesterday. The Div of Children and Families (DCF) wants to tell the 6 year old alone, and the other two together at a different time. We’ve fought so hard for reunification and establishing other kin relationships, unfortunately with no success. There will still be contact with mom but DCF has refused an in-person goodbye visit.

In looking for an image to illustrate today’s blog, I found this WordPress LINK>Reunification is Meant to Fail by Yvonne Mason Sewell. She shares an article – A Critical Look at the Child Welfare System Reunification Plans by Kevin Norell, who is a foster care caseworker.

He explains what is required of parents who want their children returned home. They have to find a job and housing. Parents are ordered into therapy, parenting classes, perhaps drug rehabilitation, and they have to find time to visit with their children. “Even an organized parent might have trouble with all that. And many of these parents are anything but organized,” Norell says.

The intent behind court ordered reunification plans may be admirable, but the reality appears to be that many plans are designed for failure, according to the 1991-1992 San Diego Grand Jury: Testimony was received regarding the hours of time which must be spent in order to comply with these plans. Defense attorneys have testified that they have told clients that it is impossible for them to work and comply with reunification. Judges and referees were observed, seemingly without thought, ordering parents into programs which require more than 40 hours per week. Frequently, these parents have only public transportation. Obviously, there is no time to earn a living or otherwise live a life. A parent often becomes a slave to the reunification plan.

From what I have read, it is not uncommon for the Department of Health and Human Resources to change the plan goal. For example, one father, through sheer determination, managed to comply with the provisions of the performance agreement. But was HRS satisfied with the result? No, HRS filed a motion for change of goal, and requested that the father’s rights regarding the child be terminated because he had failed to benefit from services in a reasonable length of time. The lower court terminated the father’s parental rights. The determined father appealed to the District Court of Appeal who reversed the decision of the lower court, holding that HRS had not met its burden of proof. The case was remanded for further proceedings. By this time, the child had been in foster care for three years.

There is more at the link if you are sincerely interested but clearly parents are not being supported in what is arguably the most important issue in their lives.

Product Placement

Product placement is a marketing technique in which a product or service is showcased in some form of media, such as television shows, movies, music videos, social media platforms, or even ads for other products. Advertising professionals sometimes call this an embedded marketing strategy.

We watched this movie, Believe In Me, last night. It was an engaging and heartwarming story about the coach of a girl’s basketball team in the 1960s. What was a bit surprising was the insertion of a very common kind of adoption narrative into a movie that didn’t need that to succeed. The narrative was true enough on the surface, as depicted in the movie – the male’s infertility, the woman’s deep desire to become a mother, the visit by the social worker and the last minute call to rush to the hospital to get their soon to be adopted baby girl. I loved the part about the girls rockin and rollin dance moves on the basketball court, as a strategy that made the coach’s effort different from how boys would be coached to play.

Because I have been sensitized to all things adoption, I noticed and my husband even noticed too. He wondered what I thought of it. So, I went looking to see if the adoption part of the movie was part of the true story. The 2006 film is based on the novel “Brief Garland: Ponytails, Basketball and Nothing but Net” by Harold Keith. The novel is about Keith’s real life nephew, Jim Keith. Asked about how factual the book or movie were, the coach laughed and said, “The book about 80 percent and the movie maybe 70.” The coach passed away in 2011. That part of his story is in this WordPress blog – LINK>”Here I Stand“. His wife, Jorene, had died before him in October of 2009.

I eventually found that the adoption part of the story is true – as written up in The Oklahoman LINK>Oklahoman’s novel to become movie – the couple adopted two children: a son, James, who lives in Oologah OK, and a daughter, Jeri, who lives in Lansing KS. They also eventually were able to enjoy their three grandchildren being part of their lives.

So, I will admit that the insertion of an adoption story into this movie does not appear to be an effort by the adoption industry to add a positive element into a movie, that it was not otherwise a part of. No way of knowing how intentional the push may have been by anyone involved with the industry. However, the movie didn’t really need that additional part of the couple’s story. Common adoption narratives are – that the birth parent did not want the child, the birth parent could not afford to provide for the child (sadly, too often absolutely believed by the mother to be a real reason), the birth parent was negligent, abusive, or somehow incapable of parenting, and finally that the adoptive parents so wanted these children, and that does appear to be true in the actual story of Coach Keith.

Who Is Really Responsible

Sharing some intelligent and knowledgeable thoughts today (no, not my own but so good, I had to share) –

Responsibility In Adoption

WHO IS REALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR FORCED ADOPTIONS?

A few people make the point that sometimes foster parents are forced by the state to adopt their foster children. Since there was some demand for a topic addressing forced adoptions from foster care, I thought this topic was important. Let’s start with some language.

ARE FOSTER PARENTS FORCED OR ARE THEY COERCED?

According to the Oxford Dictionary, “force” includes situations where a person may be threatened into cooperating with an action they would prefer not to perform. In this way, you can say that adoptive parents are “forced” to adopt from foster care under some circumstances. But I think the word “coerced” is better because it is a more nuanced word that conveys the fact that while there were no good choices, adoptive parents still made a choice.

WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THESE FORCED ADOPTIONS?

There’s a who and there’s a what. Let’s start with the “what.”

What we’re talking about is the Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA), a Clinton-era law intended to encourage state agencies to find and secure permanent homes for children waiting in foster care following the termination of parental rights. This act provides Federal monies for state agencies for each child adopted out of foster care in a given fiscal year. In order to continue to receive this stipend, the state agencies must increase the number of adoptions compared to the previous year. Agencies, therefore, train their caseworkers to push for (or coerce) adoptions so that they continue to receive these federal funds for their services. The Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) is largely responsible for the number of children in foster care waiting to be adopted as well as the coercion in adoption.

The “who” is the adoptive parent.

I know you don’t want to hear this. It is so much easier to blame someone else for your involvement in a system of oppression. But let me put this simply: You would not have been forced to adopt, if you had not been involved in foster care as a foster parent in the first place.

Leaving aside any feelings many of us have about adoption and foster care in the first place, this is factually true. The caseworker could not have coerced you to adopt, if you had not already been fostering, which most of you signed up for in the first place.

THE REALITY OF FORCED ADOPTIONS

They do happen. Period. But when we put the emphasis on adoptive parents, we shift the tragedy of forced adoptions away from the helpless party: The adoptee. We also shift the emphasis from the party who truly had no choice and was literally forced: The natural family. Because the adoptee didn’t choose to be in foster care — the adoptive (formerly foster) parent did. Because biological parents didn’t choose to engage with the system — the adoptive (formerly foster) parent did.

Before you argue that biological parents chose to engage with the system, sit down and listen. Please.

The Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) demands a supply of children to be adopted out of foster care, and Child Protective Services uses increasingly aggressive techniques to source these children. Many children in the system, even post-Termination of Parental Rights, are in the system because their parents were facing temporary situations and then the system saddled them with requirements they simply could not complete. When parents don’t complete the objectives of their case plan, their rights are terminated. Their children may be adopted “for the sake of permanency.”

ADOPTIVE PARENTS AREN’T VICTIMS

It is harmful to adoptees and their original families when adoptive parents make themselves out to be the victims in adoption. Not only does this potentially (likely) harm the adopted child and/or their first family, but it prevents the adoptive parent from healing the parts of them that are wounded by whatever causes led them to adoption. You have to be responsible for your choices. Period. As a first mother who lost her children to CPS and is now in reunion, I strive to recognize that whatever I may feel, I am not the victim. My children were. For the sake of your child, keep things in perspective. In the long run, it will also help you.

BUT WHAT ABOUT KINSHIP ADOPTION?

Kinship adoption is a true tragedy. The majority of kinship adopters didn’t set out to foster or adopt in the first place and accept responsibility for a relative’s children to keep them out of the system. In many states, they are then threatened with stranger placement, if they don’t adopt their kinship child. Adoption isn’t the right answer, but keeping children with family has to come first whenever possible. No adopter gets a free pass, but if there is an argument that can be made that kinship adopters have almost no choice because they didn’t choose to participate in the system apart from the pressure applied by the need for care inside the family.

YOU CAN DO THE WRONG THING WHILE TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT THING

It’s easy for those suffering cognitive distortions (often as a result of childhood abuse and trauma) to believe that participating in a broken system makes them a bad person.

Nobody’s saying that. We recognize the choicelessness you felt when confronted with the option to either adopt or allow a child you care deeply for to be removed from your home to be adopted by strangers — and you may never see them again.

But it is important, for the sake of your adopted child — that you not make yourself the victim of some third party — especially when that third party is faceless and nameless (“the system”).

LET’S GET VISIBLE!

Reactions and short comments can bump this topic. But comments of five words or more will help boost it in the algorithm, so it will show up in people’s personal news feeds. The way Facebook and WordPress function, your comments contribute to making sure more people see valuable content. Thank you for your support!

Sunday’s Adoption Thoughts

From another WordPress blogger – Sierra Watts – published on Feb 7th – LINK>There is nothing regarding modern day infant adoption today in the Bible! In fact, it advocates against it. She refers to it as – The spiritual warfare behind adoption choices.

She notes – If you are a Christian, you might have heard that adoption is a blessing from God. She goes on to write – In this article, I challenge the common narrative that frames adoption as a Christian virtue, arguing that it’s neither biblical, ethical, nor universally beneficial for children, mothers, or families.

I encourage you to read this for your Sunday contemplative time.

The Adoption Mistique

Since I only became aware of this book today, I thought I’d share a bit about it. Below is an excerpt from the author’s website LINK>The Adoption Mystique.

I do not accept the notion that being adopted, like being Jewish or being female should restrict my rights as a citizen. I believe that adopted persons are entitled to full restoration of the rights that were abrogated. To me it is a matter of equality and social justice.

I am grateful to my parents for their patience, courage, openness, honesty, and empathy. Our family had no adoption secrets. A record of the date and story of my homecoming and the significant events of the first four years of my life were available to me at anytime. I was a curious kid. I asked many questions. They told me my birthmother was young. She ran off with someone. Her family annulled the marriage. “What was my name”? “Rebecca, maybe Roberta.” “How do you know”? They said they had papers for me in a strong box. I could have them when I was twenty-one.

The birth of my fourth child put me in touch with my heritage in a way not previously realized. This daughter had blue eyes. That meant I had to carry a blue-eyed gene. It was time to explore more fully my family of origin. It took seven months to find my birthmother.

It took ten years, however, “divine intervention,” and many false starts to complete a search for my birthfather’s side of the family.

Along the way, I found a review by Heidi Hess Saxton on WordPress – LINK>Anti-Adoption? Review of “The Adoption Mystique” by Joanne Wolf Small, MSW. She admits that “The complexity of the issues surrounding adoption, and that to seek reform in one area is not the same as wanting to eliminate the practice altogether.

She also quotes Joanne Wolf Small from a presentation titled “The Dark Side of Adoption”- “My personal experience as an adoptee was a positive one. In the social setting in which I grew up, I thought it was OK to be adopted. In later life I became involved in trying to establish my own identity, and subsequently worked with many others toward that end. We got, and still get the message, loud and clear. It is not OK to be adopted!”

One commenter on her blog wrote – Making a life-long commitment to an adoptive child is a complex endeavor. Part of it is honoring that child’s heritage. That child does in fact have another set of parents who made life possible. From a parental view it is much like a child of divorce, a step child. It does not serve the child to deny it’s other parents. In making a life-long commitment I would hope that adoptive parents would put the child’s reality and needs foremost. If the commitment is “truly forever” it must honor the origins as well.

Blogger’s note – Because there was so much adoption in my family (both parents were adoptees and both of my sisters gave up babies for adoption), I too thought it was OK to be adopted though I yearned to know about our cultural ethnicity. My mom yearned to locate her birth mother but was denied access to her adoption file, which I now possess. I also know now who all 4 of my original genetic grandparents were. I have steeped myself deeply into facing ALL of the realities around the adoptive experience since 2017 now. There seems to be no end of perspectives to learn and so I find topics for my blog here every day.

Suemma Coleman Home for Unwed Mothers

Stumbled on 2 stories about this place today. Had not heard of this place – Suemma Coleman – before. One was from a woman who gave birth at the age of 14, 52 years ago. It was 1971 in Indiana USA. She wrote it on the 50th year after she relinquished her baby in order to share her experiences at a Facebook page called Adoption Sucks.

She writes – I’d spent the previous 6 weeks living among hostile strangers, a captive who was caught and shamed the one time I tried to escape. The home was run by a shriveled old matriarch, religious zealots/social workers and filled with self-loathing young pregnant women. There was no privacy. There was no freedom. There was an 8 foot chain-link fence around the top of the building to prevent us from throwing ourselves from the 3 story height, as others had done in the past. There was bland, starchy food served at a single huge table and forced servitude cleaning in the kitchen. There was a single pay telephone in a hallway shared by all the dorms.

My heart goes out to the young me who was sent by ambulance alone during the night to the county hospital. There I was drugged, strapped down and delivered of my precious baby boy. During his birth I was overcome with a feeling of power and overwhelming love I never dreamed possible; I never experienced it again with my subsequent children. Then they whisked him away. I was sent to the post-delivery room where a nurse viciously kneaded my abdomen to expel the placenta, while telling me I deserved the pain.

I never expected to see him again. But the orderlies on duty that night didn’t want to bother with these pariah babies so he was brought to me to feed and change. I remembered thinking I had no idea how. They’d given me a drug to dry up my milk and another caused a splitting headache when I sat up. But all that mattered was that he was miraculously in my arms. He was perfect and beautiful. Everyone commented that his long, black eye lashes gave the impression of a baby girl but his long fingers and toes predicted the 6’3″ man he grew to be. He would briefly visit me one or two more times that night before we were separated for good.

I have a memory of watching my parents standing in the hospital corridor, far away, saying hello and goodbye to their first-born grandchild in the nursery. They were crying. I felt no sympathy for them, knowing the price we were all going to pay because of their decision. My heart had already turned to stone and against them. I spent another 10 days or so for observation and recovery in the Home. Then, I was sent home with my parents, who promptly took me to get a puppy. At 14 days of age, my baby was sent to live with strangers who would be his adoptive parents. I never saw my son again.

I found another story about this home on WordPress at this LINK>JUST SOME INTERESTING HISTORY STUFF. She writes – Today was just a rough kind of day. A fellow Coleman adoptee had emailed that she finally got in contact with her natural mother. I met this gal through one of the many Indiana adoptee groups on the internet. We have kept in touch for last two years. She knew my horror story with St. Elizabeth’s/Coleman and their confidential intermediary, Katrina Carlisle. I had advised her not to use this individual. She had gone with Omni Trace which ended up ripping her off. She emailed me about a month ago about LINK>Kinsolving Investigations. I said that this company was great as long as you can afford them. I unfortunately can’t at this time. Well they found for her. Katrina had told her not to search without her assistance. Katrina did everything she could to discourage this friend from searching period. Well she recently contacted her natural mother. Low and behold, all of the information that Katrina gave her was a lie. Not surprising really. Katrina had lied to me about the law, about who I could and could not use as a CI, and other bits and pieces of my own information. I worry daily what my own natural mother has been told by this woman. I worry whether or not she was even contacted. I worry about whether or not that she took my money and fed me a line of bullshit. I worry that she tried to get more money from my natural mother. I worry that because she could not get the information that my mother wanted about me, she assumed my mother refused contact. All of these are very real worries. I have heard them from all over the country.

This was written in 2008 and she adds – “Indiana enacts a law that makes it the most restrictive state in the nation in regard to keeping adoption records confidential.” She goes on to lay out a review of history re: adoption in Indiana and St. Elizabeth/Coleman specifically, and their part in it. It begins with – 1894 The Suemma Coleman Home is founded for “erring girls and women who had been living lives of shame and had no homes.” (Today, it operates as Coleman Adoption Services.) There is more there at the link.

No point in posting all this – except – yeah, it was pretty much the same everywhere. My dad’s mom gave birth to him at the Door of Hope Salvation Army Home for Unwed Mothers in Ocean Beach, California back in the mid-1930s.

When Does The Sadness Stop ?

An adoptee writes – I just want to know: when does it stop? The pain? The crying for no apparent reason when my boyfriend leaves my townhome after a night together? The deep, abiding loneliness? I think that is what it is, anyway. It is so hard. I’ve been in therapy since the divorce over five years ago. Hell, I’ve been in therapy off and on my whole life. I thought there was something “wrong” with me until VERY recently when I heard the adoption trauma lecture on YouTube and after listening to the audiobook “What Happened to You?” by Oprah Winfrey.

This had me looking for the book. I found a review by by LINK>Sarah O’Connor on WordPress. She writes – What Happened To You? is an incredibly detailed book. The book looks at what happened to a person to cause certain behaviors, reactions, and lifestyles instead of assuming something is wrong with a person based on how they act. She thought it was a very accessible way of writing a book on trauma.

I also learned there is something called the Dart Center for Journalism & Trauma which is a project of Columbia Journalism School. They have YouTube where their executive director Bruce Shapiro had a conversation with Oprah Winfrey and psychiatrist Bruce Perry MD.

So, good to know about this book. Back to the adoptee’s thoughts. One replies – I am trying to find words. Because mostly, this resonates. I think something people forget that us domestic infant adoptees are built on trauma. Like our first out of the womb experience is LOSS. How can we be “normal”? And just when I think I have dealt with a part of it, a new part of the pain and loss pops up and says hello. Just know you are not alone. (And I am very close in age to you.) The first woman responds – You’ve described it well: just a sense of deep loss… For as long ago as I can remember.

Another writes – I thought something was wrong with me until I hit 40 and learned about adoption trauma. I’m deconstructing too, so I can relate to the added layer of complexity and questions of belonging and identity. I also have complex post-traumatic stress disorder. I’ve been doing intense therapy for several years, which helps. I try to take a lot of time for self care. Sometimes that looks like a cry and a nap. Other times it’s something more creative so I don’t fall into a funk. I don’t know if I will ever feel “normal.”

One writes – I was adopted as a small child internationally. I am now a mom of 4. Amidst the daily tasks and just life, I carry with me a deep sadness that can’t be pinpointed. It’s just there. The absence of my first parents and being far from my siblings is really soul fracturing. It feels like a brokenness in me I will live with forever.

Yet one more adoptee writes – I think I’ve realized it will never stop and I just have to learn to live with it in a way that doesn’t destroy me, which certainly isn’t an easy feat.

A Present Danger

I’ve written about this before reading this book, especially for the role that Evangelical Christianity played in the election of that former guy (the ex 45th President). There is a very strong converting the heathen masses tendency in this religious persuasion. The parallels in Octavia Butler’s prescient novel are deeply unsettling. Modern day “Crusaders” become cruel vigilantes in Christian America. They take the children of those they deem in need of re-education and place them for adoption into good Christian American homes.

The protagonist of her novel, Lauren Oya Olamina, has her infant daughter taken from her. The home that Larkin is placed in is not a happy one, echoing what so many adoptees say about their own experiences. The adoptive mother is cold and not nurturing. The adoptive father has wandering hands over the young girl’s body. Her birth mother searches for many, many years to uncover what became of her daughter. A huge upset occurs when she discovers her brother Marc knew where Larkin was all along and that as a whole-hearted believer and even minister for Christian American churches, he lies to the child (even though her mother had asked for his assistance in locating her daughter) and tells her that her mother died.

I found this WordPress review by LINK>Alive and Narrating. Like the blogger, ” I feel incredibly fortunate that I chose to read Parable of the Sower and Parable of the Talents to “officially” delve into Octavia Butler’s oeuvre.” I am almost finished with “the Talents” and have read “the Sower”.

The reviewer writes accurately that “Parable of the Talents is also the story of Lauren’s daughter, Larkin, renamed Ashe Vere after she was snatched from Acorn and her parents, the first in a series of crimes committed in a prolonged ordeal of violence, degradation, and suffering enacted by religious militants, members of The Church of Christian America.”

Her review continues – The United States, tired of the apocalyptic chaos the country has experienced during the past decade, has voted into power the fanatical and fascistic president (*)Donald Trump Ted Cruz Andrew Steele Jarret. (At one point he actually says as part of his campaigning that he will “make America great again. *SHUDDER*). Jarret is the founder of the powerful, right-wing Church of Christian America. He preaches a return to godliness, in the form of persecuting, prosecuting, and “saving” any American who refuses to lead a good Christian life. And that includes stamping out all “cults” who go against the bible’s teachings and allow women to speak and hold positions unacceptable for their gender. (*) blogger’s note – I would add Gov Ron DeSantis to this worrying mix of bad characters.

An armed group of Christian America militants invade and destroy Acorn, turn the place into a “re-education” camp, and enslave all the adults with electric collars they use to administer excruciating punishment. All the children are stolen and sent for “re-education” elsewhere to be fostered and adopted by Christian American families. Larkin Olamina—renamed Ashe Vere Alexander—grows up in one of these Christian American homes, unloved and abused by her adoptive parents, never knowing who her biological parents are. Only as an adult does she learn that her mother is none other than Lauren Olamina, founder and leader of the now-powerful and widespread religion Earthseed.

Parable of the Talents is a harrowing and frightening yet soberingly realistic story of a future United States where the separation between Church and State no longer exists, where in the absence of law enforcement on behalf of the government or even the police, the Church of Christian America steps into the void and enforces its own violent set of edicts. It’s the story of religion as a social force, used in order to uplift or to subjugate, and the ways in which it unites people out of fear and desperation, and also out of the need to believe in something more than just this universe, or simply to be more than who or what we already are.

It’s also an intimate, personal story of a mother and daughter, each of whom spend their lives needing each other and not getting the person they wanted. The true story of many adoptees and their original biological/genetic mothers who lost them to adoption, often with the coercion of their religious leaders. It’s a story of guilt, regret, bitterness, and deep, heartache pain of not having each other. Humanity needed Lauren’s Earthseed philosophy, needed to embrace change, needed something to reach for and aspire to. In adopting Ashe as his own, rather than give her back to Lauren, Marc imposes his own power over what he thinks the world should like and what his own family should look like, all from his position of power as a minister of the Church of Christian America.

The entire thing is a hopelessly and painfully knotted set of familial relationships as seen through the lenses of religion, power, morality, and destiny. These books are about people, and the humanity of people, which includes both the admirable and the detestable and all the variations in-between. Like the blogger, I feel lucky and blessed to have read these books, to have read them now, and that they exist in the universe for people to read and be inspired by.

What is also amazing to me is that Octavia Butler wrote this “current” story in 1998, which goes forward for over a decade or more beyond our current time. Octavia Butler identified in a 1999 interview the line between duty and selfishness, between caring for and saving the world and caring for and saving one’s own family. It is not a clear dividing line for most of us.

Abandoned Child Syndrome

Stitch, Nani and Lilo

I’ll admit that I knew nothing about this movie and only that there was an odd looking creature (Stitch) and a little girl. A comment in my all things adoption group had me go looking. “My kids just watched Lilo and Stitch for the first time. I had totally forgot the Children’s Aid Society and parental loss triggers. It was hard for me to see how they are telling her that her sister may be better off without her and she may need to accept that. F**** that narrative. Never better off without some of our family especially after profound loss already. Bah. My vent for the day.”

What I found was this WordPress blog by MadameAce – LINK>In Brightest Day: Lilo & Stitch and Childhood Abandonment Issues. It was there I encountered the concept of LINK>Abandoned Child Syndrome. I named my blog Missing Mom because it is on the mom side that my emotions naturally gravitate.

When we first meet Lilo, we learn that she has an active imagination, and that she has clung to the fantasies in her head as being reality, which is probably just her way of dealing with the trauma in her life. People suffering from abandonment will also have an “extreme sensitivity to perceived rejections, exclusions or criticisms. We see Lilo’s issues with abandonment constantly throughout the whole movie, and we even get a sense that she blames herself for what happened or that she cannot form strong connections with other people.

As Stitch’ behavior progressively gets worse, he opts to run away. We see Lilo blame herself. She watches Stitch go and she doesn’t try to stop him. Instead, she says that she understands why he wants to leave and that everybody eventually leaves her anyway. It is a movie that addresses sometimes uncomfortable issues directly.