Why do people continually disregard medical science/studies?
when it comes to some of the negative effects adoption? If someone asks a question such as "Do adoptees have a higher rate of depression and/or suicide", people will respond with links to medical studies. These studies/reports are from highly respected journals, yet I see people (mostly NOT adoptees) who will say the findings are bogus.
Sure, there are some links that some people would say are "biased", but I see people laughing or being dismissive at/of articles published by The American Academy of Pediatrics, or The Lancet, etc.
Is this just a denial mechanism?
I just don't understand any parent who would chose to believe that relinquishment and adoption does not have any negative psychological effects on their child.
Is it just wishful thinking on your part?
Is it the "not MY child" thing?
Do you do the same for other studies? For example, do you go into the sun without sunscreen, or is skin cancer just something that happens to other people?
Robin2009-05-12T12:44:16Z
Favorite Answer
I believe that much of the damage created is in the DENIAL surrounding adoption.
Denying that there is a difference. Denying our emotions. Denying our curiosity (to please our parents). Denying that separation at birth can cause emotional trauma (rather than dealing with that trauma). Or certainly denying that separating a 1 or 2 year old from their 1st mom & being placed with a "new" mommy & daddy is traumatic. Denying that all the trauma surrounding adoption does NOT come from the "birth mom" and/or her (alleged) life style. Denying what statistics show; that there is a higher incidence of adolescents in psychiatric facilities (proportionally).
In a book on childhood trauma, Alice Miller writes, "It is much more difficult for a child to overcome early traumatization if they are caused by their own parents." Often the most damaging aspect is the denial of a child's traumatic, scary, painful experiences by the adults in his or her life.
Children can and do survive traumatic, chaotic childhoods without severe psychological damage when the adults around them VALIDATE the chaos or trauma in their lives.
Alice Miller calls those adults "helping (or enlightened) witnesses." "Many have also been lucky enough to find "enlightened" and courageous witnesses, people who helped them to recognize the injustices they suffered, the significance the hurtful treatment had for them, and its influences on their whole life."
Adoption itself is not "bad". Sometimes adoption is a better option for a child (vs. remaining in foster care or an orphanage). Sometime that's hard for BSE (baby scoop era) adoptees to see based on the reality & history of the BSE years.
Just as hard as it is for some AP's to accept that not all 1st moms/parents are the drug addicted, HIV+, irresponsible, unfit demonized versions used to justify adoption.
Even when adoption is a better option for the child, all the denial is just as damaging.
Because no study is ever without a bias or an agenda when you get right down to it. Most of them anywasy.
However, God gifted us with common sense, and i use mine. So i firmly believe some of the studies are accurate or at least close. There are so many adoptees who DO have these problems that it would be stupid to disregard the studies and peoples own experiences. I've never attempted suicide, but i've known a few who have. Sadly, one succeeded. And he wasn't adopted.
i feel like I should answer this since I believe it is partly aimed at me (from one of my questions).
I take pretty much all scientific studies on human behavior with a grain of salt. Your skin cancer/sunscreen comparison is something TOTALLY different. Skin cancer is easy: you either have it, or you don't.
Suicidal tendencies, depression, anger, etc. are much harder to measure. How do you measure depression? How do you tell when one person is more depressed than another? Things like this are not so cut and dry.
Not only that, but the causes of these negative psychological effects can vary immensely. For skin cancer, for example, there are things in the world (such as UV rays) that we KNOW certainly cause skin cancer. How is it obvious that the adoption in particular is what is causing the depression, anger, etc. in these people? Is it not possible that issues with peers or jobs or other things could have caused this?
I'm not denying that there are adoptees out there that have negative experiences and may have negative effects from it. But there are people growing up with biological parents who have terrible experiences and also have very negative effects. Also the *probable* presence of a "primal wound" may be a cause of negative psychological effects in adoptees (but even this is not proven fact beyond a shadow of a doubt). It's just difficult to say (especially when it's so easy to skew the data to achieve the desired result).
sorry the answer was so long...I just thought I'd put in my 2 cents.
Those who continue to insist that overpopulation is a myth need to realize that most of the world's population is concentrated in relatively few habitable areas. The reason many areas of the world are relatively unpopulated is because they can't support large numbers of human beings. People can't live in large numbers in deserts, mountains, and ice caps. They need to be in areas where there are reliable sources of fresh water. In fact, some predict that in the next 100 years or so, water will replace oil as the resource nations will go to war over.
I answered the question on suicide with the same link to the American Academy of Pediatrics you referenced. The findings are a hard pill to swallow, but ignoring unbiased research is a dangerous thing to do.
How many of us know parents who have their heads in the sand where their child is concerned? Either they don't believe their child is capable of certain behaviors or they just don't want to see it. I'm like a hawk circling at a high altitude quietly keeping a sharp eye on what's going on.
Being an adoptive mother gives me more things to watch over, but I'd probably be like this if she was my biological child. Why? Because I haven't forgotten my younger days and I've been an unofficial safe house for troubled teens for years. They've helped open my eyes to the world my daughter is growing up in.