Adoption Rights Alliance

Home

ireland

ption

search reunion ireland

Adopted 'Children' and Parents: at age 50?
by Mari Steed

I recently read a letter to the editor of the Irish Times by a Mark Kearney of Trinity College. I really must reassess my whole conception of Trinity as a seat of higher learning.

I couldn't resist a rebuttal, although apparently the Times could — they didn't publish it. So I'll post it here instead:

Mr Kearney's letter rather poignantly cuts to the crux of the matter with regard to the rights of adopted people. Interestingly, in both the title of his missive and thrice in its contents he refers to himself/other adopted people as 'the child' or 'adopted children.' As someone with children and grandchildren, who votes, pays taxes and earned the right to drink and serve in the military more donkey's years ago than I care to count, I consider myself an adopted adult or adopted person, not a child. Moreover, I am an adult whose rights have been abrogated not only by the Irish State, but by the U.S. as well (specifically the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania) as I was chosen for exportation in the early 1960s. And this abrogation is what continues to keep me a 'child' in the eyes of those governments. In fact, in Pennsylvania, if one chooses to petition the courts to have their adoption file unsealed, the case is heard in the Juvenile Courts, even if the petitioner is 55. Child indeed, sir. How demeaning.

What Mr Kearney doesn't seem to understand is that the fight isn't about just the ridiculous wait times through agencies, the sometimes inept handling of our cases, or even the ingratiating and infantalising way we're generally treated by agencies, often the media and general public, our parents or other family members, and perhaps most painfully by one of 'our own' like Mr Kearney. Those are small injustices that pale in comparison to the true issue at hand: the fact that adults are still denied unfettered access to the documents of their birth in 2010.

Trace, contact and reunion are wholly separate issues and yes, understandably not everyone desires to know their heritage, medical history or who they resemble. But the right to have one's original birth certificate (a right enjoyed even by felons) should be every citizen's right. What they decide to do with that document is their own business. Perhaps they'd like to just frame it and hang it on the wall. I, too, had a very satisfactory adoptive experience and it was with the support, love and assistance of my adoptive family that I was able to trace my natural mother as well as the daughter I relinquished to adoption in the US. Both contacts were welcomes, positive and have brought me a sense of self and healing. I realise I was lucky in those results and that it isn't always that way. But I also prepared myself for the worst and knew what I could expect. All of this was accomplished on my own and with the help of friends -- the agency I first sought assistance from was not only incompetent, but unethical in many regards (c.f. vaccine trials at Bessboro' circa 1960-61).

As they say, it's foolish to mix apples and oranges and the right of access to one's birth certificate should not be confused with trace and reunion. They are not mutually inclusive. But those, like me, who have the desire to know more about who they are and where they came from, should be treated with dignity and respect, and not as some ungrateful, whingeing 'child' riddled with insecurities and self-esteem issues.

Using terminology like 'adopted children' smacks of the concept that adoption begins and ends with the receipt of a 'warm bundle of joy,' when in fact it's a lifelong process. Perhaps Mr Kearney could benefit from the words of the Rev. Keith C. Griffith, MBE: "Adoption loss is the only trauma in the world where the victims are expected by the whole of society to be grateful."

Adopted 'Children' and Parents: at age 50? by Mari Steed

Adopted 'Children' and Parents: at age 50?
by Mari Steed