Ready for Adoption?
Adoption Network Law Center
Adoption Network Law Center
Want to Adopt? Click here.
Click here to be helped in California!
Adoption Network Law Center
Pregnant? Click here.
Adoption Network Law Center
International Adoption Blog

10/18/07

True orphans and unhelpful guilt

Posted by : Sandra Hanks Benoiton in International Adoption Blog at 06:57 am , 872 words, 424 views  
Categories: Adoption in the World

I've been reading the comments on Mary's Ethiopia blog about "true orphans", and although I have posted one there myself, I, like Erin, feel something blog-length would be appropriate.

Before addressing the issue face-on, I'd like to recount a story, a true story, of an event that took place in Mexico some years back ...

A group of women put together an adventure travel trip through Yucatan that involved a lot of riding in a van and camping in places tourists very rarely visited. They traveled with two guides, both indigenous tribal people from the area.

One night, as they sat around a campfire after a meal talking of the day's wonders, a man came out of the forest, explained to the guides that there was a woman dying in a nearby village and asked for help.

SPONSOR

One of the women in the tourist group was a doctor and another was a nurse, so they immediately grabbed their gear and took off with one of the guides and the villager.

When they arrived in the very small village they were led to a hut in which a girl of about eighteen was hemorrhaging after giving birth to what they learned was her fifth child. Her other four children, as well as most of the village, had gathered to watch the slow process of her death.

With the guide translating, the doctor informed the husband of the dying woman that there was little she could do aside from make the woman as comfortable as possible as her life ebbed away. The nearest hospital was days away over rough roads, and there was no way she would make it. She had already lost so much blood that her death was imminent.

The husband began to rant and rave, and both the doctor and the nurse were shocked when his diatribe was interpreted for them. What it basically amounted to was a vicious attack on the dying girl that went something like this:

"Stupid women. I knew something like this would happen. She refused to have sex with me because she didn't want to have any more children, and now God has punished her for that ridiculous behavior and sinful attitude. I had to beat her and rape her, and she fought me and angered God. And now what? Now I'll have to raise these children alone! I don't have time for these children! The baby will die with no milk, but the others will want to be fed." And so on ...

I was inspired to revive this true-life account by a question from one of Mary's readers who asked, "The idea of that -- a mother for whom the best option is giving up her child(ren) for adoption continuing to HAVE many additional children is inconceivable and upsetting to me. Does she not have any support for trying to NOT get pregnant? Do the US adoption agencies encourage it somehow?"

Birth control is ILLEGAL in many Catholic countries, and even where it is allowed by law it is most certainly NOT allowed by the church. Women have ZERO option but to have child after child, and when their lives are a misery of grinding poverty, daily abuse, and a straight path to an early death offering their children the option of a better life may be the only power they have.

It is only from deep in the comfort of a life of vast riches and endless options ... and compared to much of the world that is exactly what America provides ... that questions like those above and judgments levied that suggest parents are wrong to offer their children another life in another world because of something as simple as poverty can spring.

In the tale above, a couple of the women on that trip would have very happily brought that baby home and given her a life, and the father and grandparents would very happily have seen that happen. In fact, they asked that someone take the baby with them that night. That not being legally possible, the baby most certainly died within a very short period of time, if not within minutes of the team leaving and at the father's hands. The survival of the other children is also doubtful, all being under five and not terribly healthy to begin with.

Had these children been adoptable ... which would have required legal involvement not available for hundreds of miles ... they would not have been true orphans.

Any idea how many times something like this scenario plays out around the world? Thousands? Millions? Yet well-fed people in comfortable chairs type out worries about making " ... child-bearing and parenting into something akin to the business of puppy mills", and beat themselves with the guilt stick for the rest of their lives because their child may have a living biological parent somewhere in the world.

Although it is for some reason considered very un-PC in the adoption community, it must be understood that the world is not a nice place filled with sweetness and light, and for millions of children the chance of a family that wants them ... heck! the chance of regular meals and a life that may last more than five years ... would seem a miracle.

Comments, Pingbacks:

Comment from: Chromesthesia [Member] Email
That is one of the most depressing things I've read in ages.
It makes my stomach ache.
Why doesn't the Church do more to protect these women? I hate when established social institutions unconciously support things that are wrong.
I don't think a lot of folks that are against international adoption understand that it's not a simple matter of providing birth control when things are so miserable for a lot of women in a lot of countries.
PermalinkPermalink 10/18/07 @ 08:29
Comment from: tanyajill [Member] Email · http://asinglemum.blogspot.com/
Thank you for this post.
PermalinkPermalink 10/18/07 @ 09:09
Comment from: JA [Member] Email
Thank you so much for posting this. I totally agree with the points you made, especially the last paragraph.
PermalinkPermalink 10/18/07 @ 12:34
Comment from: Erin H [Member] Email · http://transracial.adoptionblogs.com/
Love ya Sandra!!!
PermalinkPermalink 10/18/07 @ 14:29
Comment from: Veronika [Member] Email
Case in point, Baby R in your previous post. She most likely still has living parents, in fact it is probably her mother who dumped her upside down in a bucket to die. She is not the only child this happens to.

Last year a baby made headline news in South Africa. Why? Because her mother took a taxi to a remote location when she realized she was in labor and then put the newborn in the opening of a storm water drain so the baby would wash away and drown when the water came down. The first person who walked by and found the child tried to rape her. When he couldn't succeed in his attempts he threw her back on the ground and left her there. The next morning someone else found her and called the police. So her first night in this world was spent in the cold and dirt, covered with ants and lacerations from her attempted rape. She was placed in foster care, then later removed and placed with her maternal grandparents. She died at six months old of pneumonia and the grandparents claim that she never recovered after that first night in the cold. Strange how she thrived with her foster parents for the months she spent with them.

The world is not a pretty place. Best leave the flagellation rods in the cupboard and face reality.
PermalinkPermalink 10/18/07 @ 15:43
Comment from: John [Member] Email
I've been reading the posts on 'true orphans' and the rightness or wrongness of adopting a child who has living parents. There seems to be a feeling with some folks that they surely have no right to parent if the birthparent is alive and not part of an open adoption.

It seems to go to the idea of kids as property of their parents. If they are just property, yes you are taking something owned by someone else. If they are separate beings, aren't they entitled to decisions based on best iterest of the child? Should most of the kids in foster care in the US be denied an adoptive family because most have living birth parents? What about mothers who can't raise their child, should that child be denied an adoptive home because she didn't have the decency to die? Why is the birthmother's decision to place her child automatically wrong and to be ignored? Kids come first. John
PermalinkPermalink 10/18/07 @ 16:02
Comment from: Lisa [Member] Email · http://guatemala.adoptionblogs.com
Sandra, amazing blog!!!!
John - excellent excellent point about children not being the property of their parents.

About birth control in Guatemala. I read about an organization (can't remember its name)that is trying to provide free birth control to indigenous women and they cannot keep up with the demand. Many of these women would be beaten or worse if they told their husbands and extended families they were using it. Over 70% of indigenous women are illiterate so reading directions for taking pills is a challenge. They were given the shots that postpone menstruation. Even though there are always suspicious that not indigenous people in Guatemala want them to become extinct, they trusted the foreigners enough to take these shots.
Lisa
PermalinkPermalink 10/18/07 @ 22:19
Comment from: romee_1101 [Member] Email
I read this blog the other day Sandra, and opened up the paper last night to find a story about an African woman (who now lives in my hometown). Her mother died in childbirth, the family could not care for the baby, so they buried her alive with her mother. Some people saw the burial, dug her up, and she was adopted by a woman from another tribe. This woman supported her desire for an education (and loved her), but because adoption was not acceptable in the tribe, she spent her growing up years being harassed and tormented.

Just another story of what it is really like in countries with grinding poverty.

Romee
PermalinkPermalink 10/19/07 @ 06:57
Comment from: tshihamba [Member] Email
I have to wonder why the writer states that it would not have been "legally possible" to adopt this child. Perhaps she has not read the USCIS definition of orphan. The orphan can be from one parent, if the other parent is deceased and the remaining parent is not able to care for the child. I am in the process of just such an adoption. It's call and independent international adoption.
PermalinkPermalink 10/22/07 @ 09:40
Comment from: cholul06 [Member] Email
I fully admit that I know nothing about other areas of Latin America… but I do know about Yucatan. I was shocked to find this scenario and to see it attributed to having happened in Yucatan. Please know that (1) there is no place in Yucatan that is “days away” from medical help – and we have excellent indigenous midwives who work well with the medical community and there is a government supported medical facility near everyone in all of Yucatan. (2) Yucateco children are a treasure. The survival of all of these children, including the newborn, would have been ensured by the father and the extended family. You will not find children from Yucatan available for adoption unless there is some extreme circumstance. Even when it is necessary for a Yucateco child to be placed in an orphanage, they are near their home and extended family, and often go home every weekend.

Many of the Mayans are poor – but that does not mean they are starving and it does not declare them unfit as parents, as evidenced by their thousands of years of history as the phenomenal parents they are. Oh – and, by the way, the Church lost the fight against birth control in Yucatan a long time ago.
PermalinkPermalink 11/22/07 @ 10:10
Leave a Comment: You need to login to leave comments.:

Login | Register

Login To AdoptionBlogs.com

Search

Sponsors

AdoptHelp
AdoptHelp
AdoptHelp
AdoptHelp

Misc

Subscribe to International Adoption Blog

 Enter your email address:
 

 

Who's Online?

  • Guest Users: 189