Adoptee reunions won't erase all our sorrows--nor should they be expected to

Lorraine

Adoptees often write that they feel that they are responsible for their first mothers' reunion happiness. Some write that they do not want to be the person always in charge of another person's joy or grief. One of our regular commentors, adoptee Dpen wrote:

"Regardless of the situation...in the end the tears fall like boulders on the adopted ones. Not allowed to show our grief as it may be hurtful to one or both of our mothers...no matter how we feel, no matter where are loyalties might or might not be we are judged as not being good enough, compassionate enough, and yes, [not] good enough to anyone. We were born, adopted, lived and grow up "being adopted" and we are not able to voice OUR realities without SOMEONE trying to manipulate the story to make THEIR situation better, to MAKE us feel or do certain things to make the mothers feel better. 

Anyone wonder why we may be a little angry at times?"

I've read this comment in various guises before and it's always bothered me because I couldn't quite understand why adoptees stated  they felt so responsible for the first mothers' contentment and happiness. It went beyond what the non-adopted feel towards their parents. 

'I KNEW SHE WOULD COME AROUND'

I loved my mother, but when I did all kinds of things that did not make her happy--such as study

My parents, Victoria and Harry Dusky 

journalism rather than nursing or teaching, leave home after college, and even get my own apartment in a strange city--it didn't occur to me NOT to live my life as I chose because I would make her unhappy. I did not really worry that in following my own path I would be the cause of her grief. I was aware of it, I didn't go out of my way to hurt her, but in simply being myself for the longest time I know I did, and I also know I did not worry about it in the same way that many adoptees have expressed it. I knew she would come around, and that she loved me in spite of my choices. 

One of my male friends said when his son was born: Kids--they have you by the cajones. What he meant what that you, the parent, worry about your children night and day, want the best for them, will do all kinds of things for them. Yet at the same time, they are not worrying about your well being in anything like the same fashion. You, the parent, do not have your children by the cajones. They have a freer attitude: I didn't ask to be born, thanks for everything, but I have my life, see ya around. Oh, I don't mean that children don't take care of their parents when they are sick, look after their finances, do all the respectful things that are normal, but--it's different. We aren't as invested in our parents well-being as much as they are in ours.

Now add being adopted to the mix. For them, this normal role may be skewed. What do they grow up hearing--even if not explicitly, because the situation itself writes the script: You were chosen. (Implicit message: So you better be worth it, kiddo) You are special. When we saw your for the first time, we knew you were ours. (God sent you to make our lives better; ergo, we expect you to live up to that.) Even if the adopted child (and I do mean young'un here) doesn't hear about how much trouble and cost was involved in acquiring this precious bundle, the message make its way to the child that he didn't come into the family with a toss of the genetic dice--he is special. Those genes were meant to be arranged just so--just for us. And thus, you, the adoptee, are expected to be good. Follow our rules. That is the way it is ordained. Toss in hearing at all about infertility, miscarriages, et cetera, and you're setting up a child to feel the weight of all his or her parents present and future happiness. Yo! No wonder some rebel, some are angry. 

One of my friends told me about the speech an adoptive mother made at her son's bar mitzvah--I know for a fact that this woman had several miscarriages, and two children who died within three day before she and her husband turned to adoption because of a deep, insatiable longing for a child. Her bar mitzvah speech was about how the child was god's gift, how special he was, how god picked him out, yadda, yadda, yadda. Everybody in the room--a big, expensive room--knew about the miscarriages, the dead babies, the adoption, because the woman has written about it. Of course, he had to know too. I can't imagine that he doesn't care a lot of emotional freight regarding his mother.* 

From the comments we get from some adoptees, I sense: Look at all my (adoptive) parents they have done for me! I could be in an orphanage or god-knows-where! I love them, damn straight, but I also owe them. I am responsible for their well-being and happiness. 

'TEARS FALL LIKE BOLDERS'

Now along comes a reunion, and a crying first mother who is supposed to be overjoyed that she has found her lost and sorely lamented child (who is now all grown up, with needs and attitudes that may be different from one's own) and the adoptee not only doesn't expect that, but rejects it. We first mothers are crying because we can't really dam up the emotions, and the adoptee may think: What! She's crying? She needs me to "fix" her pain! I've been doing that for someone else all my life! I just can't take it anymore. I want to be the child! Give me a break, would someone give me a break here? 

Tears feel like boulders, wrote Dpen. How could they not? Reunion was supposed to bring relief, instead there is more of the same crushing emotional responsibility? After years of conditioning to acclimate one's self to "complete" a family or whatever else adoptees they are supposed to do, more of being responsible for another's fulfillment is just too damn much. One friend of mine, an adoptee, who had a good job was sending her elderly adoptive parents $1,500 a month. She could afford it, that's true, but she was not one of the wealthy. She began a search for her birth/first parents, but stopped mid-steam, which is when I met her. She said to me: What if I found them and they need $1,500 a month? 

Good point. The money was tangible proof of what her adoptive parents in another state a thousand miles away needed; it also served as a metaphor for the emotional need she might be expected to fulfill for a new set of parents.  

The solution? It's never an easy fix. If you are the adopted, with all kinds of emotions--strong and yet 
fearful--try not to put the responsibility of your first mother's reactions on yourself. Remind yourself that to a large degree, we are all responsible for our own well-being and health, and that includes your first mother and father. Enjoy the moment, and perhaps, for the very first time, feel free to be the child you were never allowed to be. Do not go out of your way to be purposefully cruel or heartless. Remember that she may have been coerced to give you up--by the custom of the times, by poverty, by her youth and her parents insistence. Accept that your first mother, or biological father, is going to be overwhelmed and very likely, weep. Tears of joy (at reunion) will mingle with tears of sorrow (for the years lost). 

Understand that we mothers who want a reunion are most likely going to carry on and quite likely, weep. We emotionally are swept back to the time and feelings we had we gave our children up. But we mothers must accept that our children can't "fix" anything that doesn't happen on its own. Just as they should not have been raised to feel responsible for their parents' happiness, they are also not responsible for ours now. I am not suggesting that first mothers hide their tears--that is likely to cost more in the long run, in terms of psychological damage--but do not expect our found children to "fix" us. Just be glad they are found. And if they have had a good life with their other families, rejoice in that too. After all, isn't that what we all wanted when we gave them up for that "better life" we were unable to provide?--lorraine

_________________________

(* This mother was unable to use the words "mother" in any form in reference to his first mother; in her writing she had become: the woman who birthed him. Of course we are talking about a closed adoption less than two decades ago. I don't see this adoptive mother handling a reunion well.  

And a personal note: I just realized from this photo of my parents that I have in my office that the vintage gown that I wore when I married my husband has the same kind of scalloped neckline.  

FROM FMF

The original and full comment from Dpen is at this post:

In adoption, in life, there will always be tears

RECOMMENDED READING

The Girls Who Went Away: The Hidden History of Women Who Surrendered Children for Adoption in the Decades Before Roe v. Wade
 Ann Fessler brings out into the open the astonishing untold history of the million and a half women who surrendered children for adoption due to enormous family and social pressure in the decades before Roe v. Wade. An adoptee who was herself surrendered during those years and recently made contact with her mother, Ann Fessler brilliantly brings to life the voices of more than a hundred women, as well as the spirit of those times. --Amazon

The Adoption Reader: Birth Mothers, Adoptive Mothers, and Adopted Daughters Tell Their Stories
With eloquence and conviction, more than 30 diverse birth mothers, adoptive mothers and adoptees tell their adoption stories and explore what is a deeply emotional, sometimes controversial, and always compelling experience that affects millions of families and individuals.With eloquence and conviction, more than 30 diverse birth mothers, adoptive mothers and adoptees tell their adoption stories and explore what is a deeply emotional, sometimes controversial, and always compelling experience that affects millions of families and individuals.With eloquence and conviction, more than 30 diverse birth mothers, adoptive mothers and adoptees tell their adoption stories and explore what is a deeply emotional, sometimes controversial, and always compelling experience that affects millions of families and individuals.--Amazon. This is available for pennies, plus shipping, and well worth it for the variety of points of view. Full disclosure: Lorraine has the first essay in the book. 

ORDER EITHER BY CLICKING ON THE JACKET ICON OR TITLE. THANK YOU.