What does everyone think about this article?

I'm getting jaw ache from stopping myself getting annoyed at bits of it even though it is getting the point over about the realities of adoption.

"Since October, Dan Rather Reports has contacted nearly 100 alleged victims...." - 'nough to make me vent at the word alleged as these mothers know what they went through.

"According to Fessler, these seemingly unethical practices...." - -try the unethical practices really did happen not seemingly.

"When we asked these women who say they were victims of “forced adoption”...." - Um yes they were victims, they're not saying it as attention seeking as they really were victims.

@Taylor, I was one of those mothers (in the UK) who was coerced into surrendering. However I don't hate my son's adoptive parents as they were victims just the same as me. Unlike countries such as USA it only costs £140 to adopt nor were they infertile. They believed the lies that I didn't want to raise my son, I chose adoption and I wanted him to have two parents. In reality I wanted to raise my son, I never agreed to him being adopted, I didn't see any paperwork until post reunion and I didn't sign the Consent toRelinquish form. I was told they were infertile but they did go on to have a son of their own. The lies I was told were terrible and it took me a long time to forgive my parents and the adoption agency.

I just really, really hope that in another 30 years there aren't articles being written about how it was still going on in 2012.

You're never going to eliminate parental bullying and coercion - some people are just like that, and if they weren't bullying their children into giving kids up for adoption they'd be bullying them into going to a university they don't want to, or taking a course they have no interest in. But what you can eliminate is the official support for it. If the reaction of priests, social workers and so on to a parent trying to force a child into giving up their baby is "no, it does not work like that, it is HER choice" then that at least marginalises the bully, not the expecting mum.

Edit: Pip, the reporter has to be a bit careful with the wording because if they state that a particular person was treated in a particular way and it turns out not to have happened _in that case_ then the person accused of doing it could sue them for libel. So what they do is word it such that what they have stated is that the person said it happened. That's not libel, because it's a fact that the person said it happened whether it really happened or not.

This truly breaks my heart. I'm pro-adoption, except for when something like this happened. When a mother is forced, that is truly the worst thing. And those were some horrible stories. I believe them 1000%, who wouldn't? They're not looking for attention, they're exposing those evil people for what they had done.

What I don't like is, some may give hate to the adoptive parents, though they may not have known what was going on at the time. Maybe they also could've given reactions from the adoptive parents finding out, whether they be good or bad? I'm not calling the article biased, it just would've been interesting.

@MinnieMouse: Then I take back my last statement, I am truly sorry. I have met people that had no clue that the mother was being forced into surrending their child.

@Carol: Thank you for sharing your story. People needed to hear it. I am sorry for what happened, but I'm glad you have the stregnth to share.

Im glad that our revolution is making news over there. I hope, as I know a lot of other Aussie victims of the BSE do, that governments everywhere begin their own inquiries so that that horrible word "alleged" is dropped from articles like this one, I know exactly where Pip is coming from with that.......If you read the findings of the Australian Senate Inquiry you will find that one of the recommendations is that NO ONE EVER AGAIN be permitted to deny what happened and that NO ONE be able to use the excuse that it was just the way society was......that was one of the recommendations that had me crying with relief the day the report was tabled Pip, the fact that finally a bunch of people NOT affected by forced adoption understood what it was that natural mums and their offspring had been put through.

@Taylor: Honey, in many cases the AP's were totally aware that the children they were adopting were NOT surrendered willingly, its one of the things that came out during the inquiry, that society on a whole was aware of the situation. I know for a fact that my adoptive parents knew that I hadnt been willingly surrendered by my mother, they actually told me that many times while I was growing up, that my mother had been given no choice, that she would have been forced to surrender........they wanted to reassure me that my natural mother loved me.........and it did help in some ways but it also gave me the guilt of knowing the pain that my natural mother was enduring.

@Josh: Youre wrong, these adoptions were NOT a minority, they were the overwhelming majority and its time everyone woke up and faced the truth. The FACTS brought out by the Australian Inquiry into Forced Adoption are NOT open to dispute, these matters have been proved beyond a shadow of a doubt, your inferrence that they are a minority is offensive in the extreme.....in Australia alone there are estimated to have been more than 200,000 forced adoptions and it looks like the number may actually be a lot higher as more and more people speak out. Get your head out of the sand.

I was one of the women interviewed for this article and all I can say is that I am grateful that this is finally being exposed as a woman's abuse issue even here in the USA. Thanks for sharing the link here. I am the Carol quoted at the very end of the article.

I saw that DW. I think it's great except for the fact that they minimize the US's participation. Like it happened on a small scale here!

What's wonderful is that this abomination is actually ACKNOWLEDGED in Australia!

Where are OUR voices? Muffled as to not cut into current US practices and PROFITS, of course.

Let's just remember that these adoptions are the minority and not give adoption a black eye.How about an article about birth mothers who willingly gave up their children so both could have better lives to balance things? Why does the media only want to publicize these adoptions?

I'm glad that it's being talked about & I'm also glad that things have changed a lot since then.

Same old stuff.

ETA:

I just mean, nothing really new, for somebody following the latest scandals.

Adoption is better than abortion.