I’m sorry to give John Rosemond’s opinions yet another forum, but I was chaffed by an article entitled “Adoption is no big deal” in Saturday’s issue of the Atlanta Journal–Constitution. Rosemond, a supposed “traditional parenting” expert does not believe that children who are adopted should be told they are adopted:

“until it is either necessary or they are old enough to comprehend the implications, ask intelligent questions, and participate in rational discussion.”

At what age do children comprehend the implications of adoption, ask intelligent questions and participate in rational discussion? I’m still trying to comprehend the implications of adoption. Besides that my Chinese-born daughter will have noticed she is “different” from the family long before she reaches adulthood. In fact, we’ve already been through the stage where she believed that all people were born dark-haired, with almond eyes and grew to be blonde with blue eyes!

I love it when “experts” cite one anecdote to then go on to make a generalized point.

“I have a friend who did not discover he was adopted until he was 19. When he asked his parents why they never told him, they answered that it made no difference to them. The explanation was satisfactory, and my friend went on to become a highly successful professional, a truly decent human being.”

So what? There’s much I find offensive about this anecdote. Am I to assume that because the fact that the child was adopted “made not difference” to the parents, it “made no difference” to the child? Or the fact that they made little of his adoption made him a truly decent human being? Would he have been a less decent human being if he’d done a birthparent search or wanted details about his adoption?

Ok – I’m all for not making mountains out of molehills (a cliché Rosemond throws into this column). And around this family, we try to do just that. BUT, that doesn’t mean not acknowledging the facts from the get-go. When KayKay was 2, I married Super Dad. While she has always called him “Daddy” we have always explained to her the concept of stepparents and step-siblings. I don’t introduce my stepchildren to others as “step”, but we don’t deny the existence of this relationship, either. And whether I make a mountain or a molehill out of our blended family – there are still issues that arise because of it. (Like an awkward moment at the underwear store just yesterday, when KayKay and I ran into my stepdaughter and her mother shopping.) If we ignore the fact that we’re a blended family does it make it less of a deal – NO. If we tackle it head-on, openly, and continuously while the kids grow (and matter-of-factly) – that seems a much more healthy way. And we discuss the questions and concerns our children have about this relationship as they arise – with no shame or secrecy attached.

Rosemond is convinced (according to his column) that “the standard recommendations dispensed by adoption experts are silly, pointless, and even counterproductive.” Such insulting language! He goes on to say:

“According to one adoption professional, I am recommending an approach that could result in ‘trauma” to a child who discovers, on his own, that he was adopted. This is not just far-fetched, but also an example of the general tendency among mental health professionals to dumb-down the definition of trauma to include any and all disruption of some baseline emotional state. I propose that a child who becomes truly traumatized at the discovery that he was adopted was already emotionally fragile.”

When I first read this part, I was livid, knowing what I do about parenting traumatized children. But now I realize how much Rosemond does not understand about adoption. Who does he think the vast majority of adoptees are? Healthy white infants who look exactly like their adoptive parents and were placed in their arms on Day 1? While this sometimes happens, this is not the vast majority of adoptions.

Many adopted children don’t need to be told that they are no longer parented by their birthparents, they know it. They have been living in foster care, in orphanages, with grandparents…they are old enough to know that their new adoptive mom isn’t the person they’ve always called mom. In many cases they have been neglected or abused prior to being adopted. They have memories (even pre-verbal memories) So yes, they are already emotionally fragile.

Even if they were adopted as infants and the “truth” could be hidden from them, I don’t believe for a second, as Rosemond does that “once upon a time, people did not think adoption was a big deal.” No, adoptions were hidden in the “olden” days due to shame, or a belief that if you told the child they were adopted you would stigmatize them.

So who is he writing this “advice” for? And who does it help? How does hiding or ignoring the adoption help the child? Or is it a way to lessen the parent’s own discomfort about having to deal with some hard life issues?

Does Rosemond believe his own stuff? Or is he trying to sell himself? I find myself asking that every time I read one of these columns. How dare he sell columns at the expense of adoptive children! What a fabulous tribute to National Adoption Awareness Month. Grrr…