Some Quotes and the Summit of the Moral Pedestal

hub*Clearly, the specific experiences of triad members vary, but there is commonality of affective experiences which persists throughout the individual’s or family’s life cycle development. The recognition of these similarities permits dialogue among triad members and allows those professionals with whom they interface to intervene in proactive as well as curative ways.
The presence of these issues does not indicate, however, that either the individual or the institution of adoption is pathological or pseudo-pathological. Rather, these are expected issues that evolve logically out of the nature of adoption. Before the recent advent of open and cooperative practices, adoption has been practised as a win/lose or adversarial process. In such an approach, birth families lose their child in order for the adoptive family to gain a child. The adoptee was transposed from one family to another with time-limited and, at times, short-sighted consideration of the child’s long-term needs. Indeed, the emphasis has been on the needs of the adults – on the needs of the birth family not to parent and on the needs of the adoptive family to parent. The ramifications of this attitude can be seen in the number of difficulties experienced by adoptees and their families over their lifetimes.


There’s no place for woolly thinking anymore when writing about adoption, it’s too complex, there are too many exceptions, variations, contradictions and proofs of the opposite. It’s really not for the faint-hearted, the half-hearted researcher or those on pedestals of their own or anyone else’s making. How often we see those self-appointed ‘experts’ who advise, preach and advertise their wares as if adoption is a subject that you can do a few courses in and be proficient.

Read the rest here: Some Quotes and the Summit of the Moral Pedestal.

Thoughts from Lara: Clearly I see adoption as human trafficking – creating a family whereby destroying another family is immoral and should be illegal. Poverty creates these Third World conditions.  Yes, children do need to be parented. If a child needs a home, then new parents should become a legal guardian to him/her while the children retain their identity, name, history, ancestry and should have some contact with the biological parents with supervision if there are severe issues.  Children would never choose to be adopted. A child is a pawn in this adoption game of human trafficking. It is not about best interest if you erase a child’s identity.  Adoption is a perversion in that regard. Adoptees ultimately play the roles demanded by society and expected by some adopters. That is no way to live. That is ridiculous. Why create something that harms and hurts children? I do not have the answer!


  1. I very much appreciate your comments. I am so against erasing a child’s identity. Absolutely. It is frightening and painful and inhuman to see how babies and children are still being commodified. As I have said elsewhere, it is the child’s rights that must come first. I so admire your advocacy on this issue.


Let's discuss!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.