Book Review "Twenty Life-Transforming Choices"

Eldridge, Sherrie. Twenty Life-Transforming Choices Adoptees Need to Make. Colorado Springs:      NavPress Publishing Group, 2003. 1-288. Print.   

    Sherrie Eldridge is an adoptee that was given up for adoption at the age of a few days old. Eldridge is an award-winning author and public speaker. She is also known for writing “20 Things Adopted Kids Wish Their Adoptive Parents Knew” and her renowned adoption blog called Café Adoption.
    This is a work of personal narrative and a guideline on adoptee decisions that speaks directly to adoptees with a partial relation to others interested in the subject of adoption. Adoptees should be warned that this book has to deal a lot about negative connotations with adoption and the situations adoptees experience.
    Rating: 1) I highly recommend this book for both academic audiences and self-educating persons that would like to know more about the life of an adoptee (especially recommended for adoptees because of major relevance).
    I recommend that the libraries purchase this book because it helped me finally relate my life to something and other adoptee students here should have the opportunity to read it.
    Sherrie Eldridge’s book “20 Life-Transforming Choices Adoptees Need to Make” is a riveting read that addresses the issues adoptees face every day for their whole lives. The main idea that Eldridge tries to portray to her audience is the emotional road blocks all adoptees face and how everything that has happened to them since conception is in some way influenced by this category of negativism, whether it be conscious or subconscious.Her major objectives in this work focus on feelings from pain and anger to loneliness and self-esteem.

    I believe a major strength she displayed was, not only her relation to the subject, but also her knowledge of the major issues that adoptees experience throughout their entire lives; she even mentions many interviews of adoptees and adoption experts. Another major strength I would like to state about her writing, particularly for this book, is her addressing the biggest questions/issues adoptees face and the recommended beginning for betterment on those particular subjects.
    Apart from her strengths, I think the only weakness Eldridge exposes is her undying negative attitude attributed foul metaphorical images towards the many subjects she addresses. Prior to her actually addressing the many issues and questions she poses she places an intimately negative relation all readers can relate to in order to associate that particular topic. For instance, in the very first paragraph in chapter four she asks the readers if they have run fingernails on a blackboard and if they experienced the “physical and aural discomfort” it creates in order to make one cringe. I don’t believe that all of her metaphorical images are bad, but I do believe some of them could be replaced with a better example; such as a person telling themselves they are good enough for someone and they still back down from ever introducing themselves. This would set up a better associated feeling towards want for somebody than the negative ‘cringe’ inside somebodies stomach she portrays.

    The greatest theme I was able to associate from this text and the texts in class was the adoptees powerlessness in their lives. The article “Five Faces of Oppression” by Iris Young distinctly sticks out to me when addressing the powerlessness debate in adoption ethics and the congruencies with Eldridge’s “20 Life-Transforming Choices” because they both hint towards adoptees being “victims” according to Eldridge. “The powerless are those who lack authority or power even in this mediated sense, those over whom power is exercised without their exercising it; the powerless are situated so that they must take orders and rarely have the right to give them” (Young, p. 56). "Because our birth mothers made a choice for us that dramatically changed the course of our lives and over which we had no control, many of us have a foundational belief (often unconscious) that we don’t have the right to choose our own course in life. We feel instead that we are at the mercy of others" (Eldridge 1-288).

    I would also like to argue that Eldridge brings up entirely new ideas to consider when addressing adoption and adoption ethics because she goes on to state how the adoptee can overcome the issues mentioned in the book. After each chapter she writes a “How to Begin” section in order that particularly addresses adoptees and how they can overcome the issues and answer the questions they might have about their lives. These end of the chapter sections really shed light on the gray areas for adoptees who are lost and that seems extremely important when thinking about how adoption works.

    She mentions different emotions and feelings adoptees have and she goes deeper in analyzing them rather than just scratching the surface which we sometimes do in class. For painful feelings, Eldridge interviewed hundreds of adoptees and came up with four major styles of running from pain: numbing out, compulsive overeating, drug addiction, and workaholism. She gives examples of all of these methods of running and more, then goes on to discuss different ways adoptees think about pain and how they can embrace those painful feelings. She uses almost this exact method throughout the book, pulling from her own personal experiences and from interviews. This gives a completely new thought on adoption ethics because it makes us question, as readers, what we are going through and how we may compare to adoptees that are going through all of these different unbelievable experiences.

    From my own experience, I have actually been able to connect with this book much more than I have ever been able to in any other book. I can understand everything she touches on because I have felt the exact same feelings and asked the exact same questions she asks and answers. I have been able to analyze my own adoption story and draw educational conclusions from her chapters.

-Michael

Book Review: "The Kid"

Savage, Dan.  The Kid: What Happened After My Boyfriend and I Decided to Go Get Pregnant.  NY: Plume, 2000 246 pages.

     Dan Savage is writer for a sex-advice column, “Savage Love.”  He and his partner Terry decided to adopt a child, and this is their journey of adopting as two gay fathers. 

     This piece of writing is a memoir that entails the struggles that gay fathers go through when adopting in the United States.  However, Savage uses a lot of blunt comedy to express the struggles.

     Rating: 1) I highly recommend this book for same-sex parents wanting to adopt and to supporters of same-sex adoption looking for a heartwarming story. 

     Clemens Library already owns this book.

     One topic that this memoir touches on very well is open adoption.  Savage states, “In an open adoption, the pregnant woman, called the birth mother in agency-speak, selects a family for her child, and has a mutually agreeable amount of ongoing contact with her child, usually two or three visits a year, with photos and letters exchanged at set times,” (Savage, 6).  Savage describes as the adoption with no secrets.  He makes it clear that him and his partner decided to do this in the best interest of the birth mother, as both of them have high respect for her.  Still, the open adoption comes with challenges and fears.

     One fear Dan and Terry face is wondering what the birth mother will be like.  They start to learn about open adoption from their friends Bob and Kate.  At first Bob scares Dan when starts to tell Dan and Terry that the birth mother chooses the adoptive parents from a pool.  Dan goes into a state of questions in his mind after hearing this.  For example, he states, “The birth mom chooses?  She comes to visit?  What if she’s a drunk or a drug addict?  Won’t the kid be confused?  What is she wants her kid back?” (Savage, 46).  When Bob explains open adoption in depth later on, Savage gives the reader a better and positive understanding.  The description talks about the couple and the birth mother making a lot of decisions together to make sure they are on the same page.  Some people are probably scared of open adoption, but Savage’s friend Kate states, “In open adoption, the birth mom can come and that her baby is okay, and go on with her life.  She is empowered by her decisions and soothed by the information she has about where her baby is.  She knows, she doesn’t have to worry,” (Savage, 47).

     To support the case of open adoption, Savage describes the interaction that they have with the birth mother, Melissa.  Melissa is a gutter punk with a history of some drugs and alcohol.  A gutter punk is a homeless person by choice.  She is smart and intelligent, and she could find a job if she wanted to.  However, Melissa decided to be a gutter punk after a poor family history.  She scares Dan and Terry when she tells about the amount of beer she had the beginning of her pregnancy, but she stopped right away.  For part of the memoir, they fear the effects of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome, but the ultra sounds show that the baby boy is healthy.

     Besides Fetal Alcohol Syndrome, the couple fears Melissa wanting to take the baby back after the baby is born.   However, she tries to comfort Dan and Terry saying she won’t change her mind, but Dan and Terry try to prepare themselves for the worst.  They wouldn’t even let their families buy any baby clothing or items because they didn’t want to jinx it.  In the end, Melissa does sign off on the adoption after coming to an agreement on visits and photo exchanging. 

     Finally, another challenge that Dan and Terry face with Melissa is deciding the name of the baby boy.  Dan and Terry wanted to name Daryl Jude while Melissa wants to name him David Kevin.  When they try to discuss names with Melissa, she becomes defensive and emotional.  She states, “I want to name him.  You can change his name later on, I don’t care.  But I want to give him his names and my family’s last name; it’s important to me.  When you adopt him, you can do what you want,” (Savage 138).  This part of the book gives the reader a deeper understanding of what the birth mother feels going through open adoption.  Even though her child is going through adoption, mother still face pains and emotions to the child they are caring. 

     Besides open adoption, another main topic of this memoir is the same-sex parenting topic.  First, Dan and Terry fear what society is going to say when they adopt their child.  For example, when the two attend a session for prospective parents, Dan sits in the conference room with a million thoughts going through his head as he looks around the room.  One of his thoughts included religion, and how prospective parents describe themselves in their letters.

     “More than half described themselves as Christian.  Not all Christians hate homos, of course, and some Christians are themselves homos.  But still, in America in the late nineties, it’s safe to assume that most people who go out their way to let you know they’re Christians don’t care for homos.  So, come to think of it, odds seemed pretty good that someone at the table believed that my boyfriend and I were going to hell, and had no right to take a baby down with us,” (Savage 15).

     Savage describes this behavior as being attached, “to our own oppression,” (Savage 15).  This is evident through out the book as well.  Dan and Terry continue to worry about what other people are going to think about two men being parents and raising a child.  Not only do they worry about themselves, but also about the baby.  During one of their meetings with Melissa, Dan says to her, “It’s something we’ve thought about.  He’ll have different experiences group up with gay dads than kids who grow up with straight parents.  There are places we won’t be able to go as a family, and times in his life he might catch shit for it.  Do you worry about this?” (Savage 133).  Melissa of course didn’t care about Dan and Terry being two men.  She describes them as “different,” (Savage 132), and she liked that about them.  However, Dan did ask some realistic questions about the baby’s future. 

     Finally, after the baby is born, Dan and Terry face some rough times when they travel.  During one experience on a flight to Chicago, the woman at the ticket counter thought that Dan and Terry may have stolen the baby because the he had Melissa’s last name and no mother.  Dan described how worried the woman looked, and she almost called security.  Now Dan and Terry carry the birth certificate around whenever they travel.  Still, the trouble didn’t end there.  The flight attendants and even one of the pilots asked Dan and Terry’s son, “Where is mommy?” or “Did these two boys steal you from your mommy?” (Savage 228).  The book depicts the challenges that gay fathers when taking care of their child.  Our society assumes that in order for a child to live he must have one mother and one father.  Plus, it’s interested that the woman at the ticket counter thought that Dan and Terry were stealing the baby because a woman was not present. 

     Open adoption and gay and lesbian parenting are the two main topics in the book.  However, the reader will find brief information the adoption laws of Oregon and birth father rights.  For example, “If a birth dad wasn’t around, it he wasn’t providing emotional and financial support during the pregnancy, under Oregon law he had already signed away his rights,” (Savage 49).  The birth father shows up at the very end of Savage’s memoir, and it turns out to be a good experience for Dan and Terry.  I recommend “The Kid” for anyone who wants to learn about a gay fathering experience.  It gives the reader a sense of gay adoption in a very straight society. 

-Mickey N.         

Blog Post 7: Losing Isaiah Review

    As a group, while we didn’t think “Losing Isaiah” wasn’t the most quality of films, it successfully presented many important ethical issues in adoption.

    First, the birth mothers rights were completely ignored. This is evident when Halle Berry’s character Khaila, isn’t given any papers when the adoption is finalized with Margret and Charles. Although she left her child in the garbage at the start of the film, she is still the birth mother and was not informed of what was happening with her child. The film did a good job at portraying the emotions of a woman who has lost her child. Halle Berry’s character was clearly a mourning mother, as she was caring for her friend’s children and never forgets about her own baby. It also shows both sides of a story, which is important in understanding a situation as complicated as this.

    The film displayed racial issues in adoption in an accurate way. The scene in the bathroom with Margret and Khaila was representative of the silent racism in society as they begin using race as a weapon against one another when it’s really the situation that they’re feeling hostile about. Another good example is the courtroom scene where Samuel L Jackson’s character is questioning Margret about how she’s culturing Isaiah and it’s clear that she isn’t introducing any black culture to him on purpose. It’s shown on the lawyer’s face that this is a problem for his case. The film blatantly states several times that a black child should be with it’s black mother. Whether this is proven to be true cannot be known because at the end both families come together to raise the child in both cultures.

    After watching the film, it seems that there are both positive and negative sides of adoption shown. An example of the negative would be the judicial fighting over who the child should live with, the emotional rollercoaster on both sides, and potentially scarring Isaiah. A positive example would be that he is not left alone in the hospital but has people he can rely on and a good home. However, the positive seems to outweigh the negative because it’s getting the issue across of race in adoption to the general viewing public.

Losing Isaiah. Dir. Stephen Gyllenhaal. 1995. DVD.

Judy Post 6

Michael Post 6

Mickey Post 7

Jenna Post 6

Blog Post #6: Different Views on Transracial Adoption

To begin this blog post, I will start with Adam Pertman’s chapter three in “Adoption Nation.”  One important comment that Pertman makes is, “…Incorporating an adopted child’s heritage and history into daily life is invariably invaluable,” (67).  As we have discussed in class discussions, this is true.  Pertman states that is possible if parents start, “establishing role models and making friends of that race or ethnicity,” (67).  I think that is one of the most important points to make about transracial adoption because transracial adoptees who have role models of the same heritage or culture will probably have a better view of themselves, and if they are struggling they can talk to someone. 

One thing from Pertman’s chapter that made me wonder was his comment on how adoption is, “helping to crack the walls of prejudice and intolerance on a broader scale,” (70-71).  He states, “There are innumerable white grandparents, uncles, aunts, and cousins, for example, who have surprised themselves with the unconditional love they feel for their new black or Asian or Hispanic relatives, and who have learned critical lessons as a result,” (70).  I understand where Pertman is coming from.  However, do these white grandparents, uncles, aunts and cousins think about the cultural aspects as well or are they happy because the baby is growing up in a white culture?  I think the walls of prejudice can be broken only if everyone is on the same page with having the adoptee participate in cultural enriching activities.   I hope that made sense…  This part of Pertman's chapter made me think of the movie, "The Blind Side."  In the movie, Sandra Bullock's character decides to adopt a Black teenager and include him in the Christmas card.  However, when she sends the Christmas card out to family, the response from them is, "Do you know there is a colored boy on your Christmas card?"  While I like Pertman's optimistic view, I still think there is more that would need to be done for extended family to understand race and ethnicity.  

Now, looking at Kim Park Nelson’s article, “Shopping for Children in the International Marketplace,” you can see she has a very different view on transracial adoption.  One area I found interesting was Nelson’s discussion from the remarks on race in some of the authors she critiques.  She states, “These remarks illustrate parents’ denial of the complexity and difficulties people of color face in the United States because the authors only see how diversity benefits them, explicitly ignoring how it might disadvantage others,” (102).  I think her point can be true for some, but not all transracial adoptive parents.  Some parents may forget the issue or race, etc. when adopting because they may think that since the child is growing up with a white family that all their problems of race will go away, when it reality it will most likely not be like that.   It’s important when adopting to think of ALL of the child’s needs. 

Finally, one area from Nelson’s article that I did not like was her critique on books that guide transracial adoption.  While I understand that Nelson thinks the books sound like manuals for a new product, etc., I still believe it is important for perspective parents to have something to relate to when it comes to transracial adoption.  Transracial adoption, from what we have read, is a huge decision, and it takes a lot of time.  Perhaps perspective parents can find comfort in reading these books on the adoption process.  I believe Nelson is being a little too over critical on this part. 

-Mickey N.

      

Blog Post #5 Transracial Adoption Thoughts

This week's discussion of racism is one that is of particular interest to me during this semester of my college career. I am in a Civil Rights Rhetoric/Public Address class in addition to the Adoption Ethics class that this blog is a part of. This perfectly illustrates to me the benefits of learning at a liberal arts college, where I can take two completely separate subjects that I'm learning about and begin to see how they might intertwine with one another.
This week's topic is transracial adoption. After reading the 'National Association of Black Social Worker's (NABSW) 1972 Position Statement on Trans-Racial Adoption', I begun to think about some of the topics we've covered in my other class. One stance that could be taken is that people are different and should be treated as such. The other is that we are all people and should be considered equal, without being kept separate in any way. This is what I would consider the 'color blind' way of thinking about things.
I see both sides of the issue. In Linda Faye Williams article, 'The Constraints of Race' she discusses white skin privilege. She claims, "The very gains from the civil rights 'revolution of the 1960s have been transformed in nearly Orwellian fashion into a weapon to be used against people of color in the new reconstruction of race and poverty. The new racism virtually hinges on the insistence that 'discrimination is illegal; everyone has equal rights, so what's the problem?'" (Williams, p93). People believe that because they aren't outrightly cruel or acting against other ethnic groups that it means they are not racist. However, American society continually perpetuates stereotypes that allow us to differentiate ourselves from one another based on appearance alone. Especially white people, since we haven't ever faced the same overwhelming prejudices in this country that other minority groups have. This is wrong and unfortunate but it is something that I feel is built into us all. We must consciously remind ourselves to act against our personal prejudices so that our society can inch towards complete acceptance. The Multi-Ethnic Placement Act which we read about from encyclopedia.adoption.com (http://encyclopedia.adoption.com/entry/Multiethnic-Placement-Act-MEPA/233/1.html) is one thing that I believe is positive in the realm of adoption ethics. I do believe that a person's background and culture should be acknowledged and learned about; but the adopted child can take that to the extent to which he or she wishes. One of the NABSW's statements about transracial adoption between white parents and black children is that the parents attempts to teach their adopted child how to deal with racism or the differences in their bodies is unnatural. To quote them exactly, "These actions highlight the unnatural character of trans racial adoption, giving rise to artificial conditions, logically lacking in substance. Superficialities convey nothing of worth and are more damaging than helpful." (http://pages.uoregon.edu/adoption/archive/NabswTRA.htm) I think this is a little insulting to the parent child relationship. A parents willingness to celebrate what makes their adopted child unique, while also loving them for who they are is very special and should not be called 'superficial' or made to seem demeaning in any way. There are other matters in which certain people who would not be able to provide the child with those things, should not adopt transracially... but that's a completely different matter.
Although racism is painful and the issue of 'microagressions' (Tuan & Shiao) may be a problem throughout life. In the end, hopefully the adopted child is going to grow up feeling loved for who they are and will be thankful for the life they have. Then, they can make the choice as to what they want to know about their backgrounds, as the empowered adoptee.

Blog Post #5: Transracial Adoption

The topic of racism in adoption is actually quite a touchy one and I never would have really thought of it in the ways mentioned in class but I guess it is a sensitive topic. I suppose the reason I never really thought much of it was because, I just realized this in class not too long ago, I am actually part of a transracial adoption family. My brother was adopted from Colombia when he was just four months old so I have always grown up not seeing somebody by their color. Through this I find my life to be quite special because of how little diversity I experienced growing up in tiny town, boondocks Minnesota. In fact, my brother and I belonged to the only family that brought diversity to our town. I admit it was very interesting growing up and being asked all the questions like "He isn't your real brother, is he?" or "Is he adopted?" to which I would always answer "Yes, he is my real brother because we have grown up together and we have been there for each other ever since I was born. We may not be blood related but we are of one soul." or "Actually yes, he is adopted... and so am I. I find our lives to be genuine.

This is why I was so shocked when I took the IAT (Initial Autonomic Test) for Black/White preference and it scored me as moderate preference towards Whites. I don't find myself at all as a person that consciously or subconsciously segregates people. I try to make it a point in my life to be the best person I can to everyone and treat everyone as I would like to be treated. This is why I don't believe that this test is very reliable and that I don't really trust technology to judge my own personality when there are so many things that can skew the outcome. I would prefer to be analyzed, in a way, by a professional and in person. A computer can't decipher the true morals and ethics of a persons identity when really I could turn out to be a serial murderer or the next pope if I just chose the right answers the computer agrees with.

Michael

Blog Post #5: Racism and Adoption

After our discussion in class on Tuesday, it's interesting to hear people's perspectives on racism.  One observation I made during class on Tuesday is the number of people who put the church as a source for positive messages.  I found that to be surprising because church would be at the bottom of my list or the least reliable.  I say this because when we think of the images when it comes to Jesus and the people in the Bible, the images are all of white people when they were really Middle Eastern.  I understand the church says we need to love our neighbor, etc., but when I went to church in pasty white Sartell, all I saw was judgment whenever one African American person walked in the church.  I would look at the people, and they would be staring with wide eyes.  Sad thing, we would never see the new people again.  How is this a positive message?    

Another thought that came to me from Tuesday’s discussion is how I never thought of the challenges that transracial adoption people face.  I like to think that we would love each other no matter what.  However, even a person who is adopted from an African country or Asian country and grows up in the United States faces a lot of challenges.  This scares me in a way.  I want to adopt some day, and I want a baby from an Asian country or an African country.  Will things be better when I want to adopt or will our still need a lot of help with racial issues?  I want my child to have a fulfilling and positive life.  Plus, the fact that my child is going to have to deal with having two dads instead of a mother and father is going to be hectic too.  It’s sad that racism still exists a lot, even though I believe each and every one is racism to some degree.  I hope our society can continue to get to know each other more and more and embrace culture.   

-Mickey N.