The intricacies of adoption from an adoptee’s perspective

Disclaimer

This blog post is based on personal experiences and information available as of November 2023. While I have strived to provide accurate and up-to-date information, it is important to note that certain details have been omitted or rewritten for the sake of privacy. Additionally, adoption laws, practices, and experiences can vary widely depending on the country or region involved.

Introduction

There’s a lot of opposing views when it comes to adoption. Some see it as a saving grace for children with traumatic pasts, while others view it as a traumatic experience itself, ripping children away from their families. The truth is, both perspectives hold merit. In the world of adoption, a complex and often contentious terrain, these conflicting viewpoints have created a rift, despite a common understanding that not everything about adoption is straightforwardly good.

Personal experience

Speaking from my own experience, I find myself aligned more with the group that views adoption as a saving grace. Growing up in Belarus, my life was marred by unimaginable hardship, as my biological father was a source of great suffering, who abused me physically, sexually, and emotionally. The ongoing therapy I receive serves as a testament to the scars he inflicted upon me.

In the case of my own adoption, questions often arise about how it was even possible. After all, adopting Belarusian orphans typically requires residence in Belarus or Italy. The reality is that my biological mother, seeking refuge from the horrors of our past, fled to Poland with me and my siblings a few years ago. Tragically, the immense strain led to her untimely demise, and we became part of the Polish care system, eventually finding a loving adoptive family.

Young adoptive parents

What sets my adoptive parents apart is their age. Both in their twenties, they defy the traditional norms of adoption, which often mandate a 15-year age gap between parent and child. But far from being a drawback, this has proven to be an asset. Young parents like mine possess a deep understanding of what’s crucial for children like me. They come from a more contemporary background, where technology and the internet play an integral role in our lives. Unlike parents from generations past, who may not grasp the intricacies of the digital age, I benefit from continuous discussions about online safety and related topics at home, a crucial conversation often lacking in schools.

Furthermore, they’re remarkably open about mental health, a topic that was once stigmatized across Europe. Conditions like autism and ADHD were often dismissed as mere behavioral quirks in the past. However, thanks to my young parents, there’s a refreshing lack of stigma surrounding these issues at our home. In fact, my dad openly discusses my conditions, eliminating any ambiguity. While having young parents does present its challenges, this transparency and willingness to embrace our biological backgrounds are immeasurable blessings.

Biological roots

A notable problem in adoption is the inclination of many adoptive parents to sever all ties to a child’s biological origins. This attitude mirrors the portrayal of adoption in TV shows, where children are often kept in the dark until their teenage or even adult years. Fortunately, I was spared this fate; I was old enough to comprehend the adoption process and was actively consulted about my feelings regarding it.

I am fortunate to call my parents by any term that suits me, whether it’s their first names or simply “adoptive parents.” While some sources argue against using the term “adoptive parents,” I disagree. Adoptive parents are precisely that—parents who chose to provide love and care to a child in need. For me, I call my adoptive parents simply “parents” because they’ve earned my trust. They’ve never required me to abandon my identity or conform to someone else’s expectations. I’ve always been allowed to be myself, as I am, as I was born, and as I aspire to be.

Adoption challenges

However, the reality of adoption is that my experience is rare, especially within the subset that rightly considers adoption as a form of trauma. Sadly, once a child reaches around the age of nine, the chances of adoption significantly diminish. Older children are often perceived as less likely to form bonds with adoptive parents. This results in a majority of children in the care system in England being ten years or older, whereas the average age at adoption is only three years and three months. Similar trends are observed in Wales and Northern Ireland. In Scotland, however, 66% of children were adopted under the age of five in the past year.

The United Kingdom serves as a valuable example for these statistics as it’s one of the countries where adoption is increasingly recognized as a source of trauma. This recognition largely stems from cases of forced family separation, where children and parents are torn apart against their will. Other countries grappling with this issue include the United States, Canada, Australia, as well as countries in the Americas and Asia.

In 2021, the Netherlands temporarily banned international adoption due to concerns over falsified documents, particularly in Central and South American countries, and some Asian nations. An example of this issue in Asia is the former Dutch colony of the Dutch East Indies (now Indonesia). These instances underscore the importance of vigilance in adoption.

Siblings separation

One more issue I can personally attest to is sibling separation. This occurs when siblings are adopted by different families. My case is an example of this, as my older biological sister and I were adopted by the same family, while my younger biological sister found a different adoptive family before we did.

This happens surprisingly often, regardless of the many claims being made to do everything to prevent this. I was lucky and the adoptive mother of my younger sister has done everything to keep us together, which includes moving to the city where we live, Szczecin. That doesn’t change the fact, however, that we were split apart by the Polish care system and I have a very complicated relationship with my little biological sister. After all, she’s now not entirely my sister anymore, as she was adopted by a different family, regardless of the fact that we are siblings through birth.

And this can get even more complicated in situations like of my eldest brother Vladislav, who is originally from Russia and still has a little biological sister over there. A different example of sibling separation, when biological family chooses to care for one sibling, but not the other. This was relatively okay for both of them, until the war started and their communication was mostly broken apart. It’s as complicated that eventually they had to meet recently in a country that still is regarded as an ally by Russia, but prefers to look westward at the very same time, which was their first meeting again in over a year.

In case of my eldest brother Vladislav, his little biological sister is being taken care of by their biological grandparents, who at the time saw this as a good decision, as they believed boys to be able to overcome hardship more easily. However, as Russia turned against the entire world, they learned differently, as my eldest brother’s little biological sister slipped away in depression, being very well aware of the fact that the longer the war continues, the less chance there is that she will be able to see her older biological brother in a normal way again.

And this is not the end of it, as the grandparents finally accepted that they have caused a major problem, as they are old and don’t live indefinitely. Bringing the siblings back together is suddenly something they want, but an impossibility without breaking law. With Russia being the aggressor in the war they started with Ukraine, the diplomatic missions are mostly gone. The only solution is by an allied country of Russia breaking law and their diplomatic relations with Russia to make this adoption possible, at the very same time causing problems with the United Nations and The Hague.

International law

When it comes to international adoption, the Hague Conference on Private International Law’s (HCCH) Convention of 29 May 1993 on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption is the primary treaty governing most countries’ international adoption practices. However, it doesn’t apply in most African countries, almost all of the Middle East, and a few select other countries around the world, such as Ukraine and Russia. Notably, Belarus is one of the countries where this convention is applicable.

This convention generally outlines straightforward guidelines, such as requiring that all parties involved be fully informed about the implications of adoption consent. It also stipulates that, where necessary, the mother’s consent must be obtained after the child’s birth. However, the most crucial aspect is the prohibition on inducing consents through payment or compensation of any kind.

As mentioned previously, this issue often arises in international adoptions, leading to the temporary suspension of international adoptions in the Netherlands. However, the problem persists globally, as evidenced by numerous testimonies. Additionally, this convention applies solely to international adoptions, not domestic adoptions, which we will address later. The primary reason for the convention’s shortcomings lies in its wording. Consider this direct quotation as an example:

d)  have ensured, having regard to the age and degree of maturity of the child, that

(1)  he or she has been counselled and duly informed of the effects of the adoption and of his or her consent to the adoption, where such consent is required,

(2)    consideration has been given to the child’s wishes and opinions,

(3)  the child’s consent to the adoption, where such consent is required, has been given freely, in the required legal form, and expressed or evidenced in writing, and

(4)    such consent has not been induced by payment or compensation of any kind.

Convention of 29 May 1993 on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption

You’ll notice the “where such consent is required” notes throughout the convention. However, despite reading the entire document, there’s no explicit explanation of when such consent is necessary.

The issue mirrors that of the United Nations, the European Union, and the Council of Europe, which each have established laws and rights. One notable example is human rights. Instead of explicitly defining these laws, governments are tasked with implementing them. As a result of this approach to international law, each country has its own set of rights, even human rights. Crossing the border from Poland to Ukraine would instantly strip me of many of my human rights, like snow melting in the sun. This is unacceptable, but it’s the reality we face.

This is a significant flaw in the HCCH convention: its existence doesn’t guarantee effective implementation. The only genuine requirement in the quote is “due consideration has been given to the child’s wishes and opinions.” However, this could simply mean asking a child who objects and then disregarding their wishes and opinions. After all, there’s only a requirement to consider, not actually to follow, the child’s wishes and opinions.

Fortunately, some countries do what’s right, such as Poland in the case of international adoption:

• only a minor person can be adopted (under 18);
• adoption must be in the best interest of a child;
• child adopted acquires the status of a child of the adopter;
• adoption is an irreversible inclusion of a child into a family;
• adoption is kept secret from other persons, i.e. in documents adopted child uses name of the persons who adopted him/her and who are mentioned as his/her parents;
• when child is 13 years old, his/her consent to adoption is required;
• adoption which will bring about a change of residence of the adopted child from Poland to another country can take place only when it is the only way to ensure the proper substitute family environment for the child.

Ministry of Family and Social Policy of the Republic of Poland

Domestic law

As mentioned previously, the HCCH convention’s reach doesn’t extend to domestic adoptions, which is a significant factor contributing to the documented trauma many adopted children face, even in adulthood.

Using the United Kingdom, specifically England and Wales, as an illustration once more, the only requirements for domestic adoption are being at least 21 years old and residing in either England or Wales. That’s all there is to it. No kidding, this is literally the sum total of the eligibility criteria for domestic adoptions in both countries, according to gov.uk.

You may be able to adopt a child if you’re aged 21 or over (there’s no upper age limit) and either:

• single
• married
• in a civil partnership
• an unmarried couple (same sex and opposite sex)
• the partner of the child’s parent

There are different rules for private adoptions and adoptions of looked-after children.

GOV.UK

Thus, this doesn’t provide any meaningful information until I delve into the requirements for obtaining consent from a child’s birth parents to surrender their child for adoption, as this is where the complexities arise. I will directly quote the United Kingdom’s government website to address this aspect:

Both birth parents normally have to agree (consent) to the adoption, unless:

• they cannot be found
• they’re incapable of giving consent, for example due to a mental disability
• the child would be put at risk if they were not adopted

GOV.UK

The first two points are baffling, given that this is a government website that fails to provide any further details. A straightforward example is the absence of any indication regarding the specific mental disabilities that render an individual incapable of giving consent. The website, despite being a government-affiliated platform, neglects to provide this crucial information. It’s expected to be comprehensive and clear, yet British government websites often fall short in this regard.

This lack of clarity has significant consequences. As I mentioned earlier, the eligibility criteria for adoption aren’t clearly outlined on the government website. This oversight is addressed by the British charity Adoption UK, which aptly states on its website:

To adopt, you must be:

• Over 21
• legally resident in the UK, the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man, and have been so for at least 12 months.
• No criminal conviction or caution for offences against children or for serious sexual offences. This applies to everyone in the household.

There are many other factors that will come into consideration, but none of them automatically exclude you. The most important thing is that you are resilient and able to put your adopted child’s needs first.

Adoption UK

Indeed, the crucial aspect of the adoptive family not posing a danger to the child is conspicuously absent from the British government’s website.

One might argue that individuals involved in adoption proceedings would meticulously scrutinize the relevant legislation. However, the sheer volume of the Adoption and Children Act 2002, encompassing three parts and nine chapters spanning over 30,000 words, renders thorough examination a formidable task. This complexity can lead to misunderstandings, even in the hallowed halls of justice.

Consider the incapability to give consent that I mentioned earlier. According to the Adoption and Children Act 2002, this would apply to individuals outlined in the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

52 Parental etc. consent

(1) The court cannot dispense with the consent of any parent or guardian of a child to the child being placed for adoption or to the making of an adoption order in respect of the child unless the court is satisfied that—

(a) the parent or guardian cannot be found or lacks capacity (within the meaning of the Mental Capacity Act 2005) to give consent], or

(b) the welfare of the child requires the consent to be dispensed with.

Adoption and Children Act 2002

And here’s what the Mental Capacity Act 2005 states:

2 People who lack capacity

(1) For the purposes of this Act, a person lacks capacity in relation to a matter if at the material time he is unable to make a decision for himself in relation to the matter because of an impairment of, or a disturbance in the functioning of, the mind or brain.

(2) It does not matter whether the impairment or disturbance is permanent or temporary.

(3) A lack of capacity cannot be established merely by reference to—

(a) a person’s age or appearance, or

(b) a condition of his, or an aspect of his behaviour, which might lead others to make unjustified assumptions about his capacity.

(4) In proceedings under this Act or any other enactment, any question whether a person lacks capacity within the meaning of this Act must be decided on the balance of probabilities.

(5) No power which a person (“D”) may exercise under this Act—

(a) in relation to a person who lacks capacity, or

(b) where D reasonably thinks that a person lacks capacity,

is exercisable in relation to a person under 16.

(6) Subsection (5) is subject to section 18(3).

Mental Capacity Act 2005

So, upon reading this, can you definitively determine who is unable to give consent? The reality is, you cannot, as the law fails to provide clear guidance on this matter. Moreover, it explicitly states that the impairment’s permanence is irrelevant.

This would effectively mean that an individual deemed temporarily incapable of giving consent, which the law doesn’t clearly define, could lose their children to adoption if a court accepts that they lack such capacity. This is an egregious injustice that results in capable parents losing their children to adoption, a prevalent issue in the UK and a significant contributor to child trauma.

It’s also perplexing that the UK doesn’t fully utilize the system of deputyship, known as conservatorship in most other countries, which recognizes individuals lacking legal capacity to consent. This system could prevent countless instances of children being wrongfully removed from capable parents solely based on the accusation of temporary incapacity.

It’s deeply concerning that this system existed long before both the Adoption and Children Act 2002 and Mental Capacity Act 2005, yet neither of these British laws makes any reference to it. It appears as if these laws were crafted by individuals with a rudimentary understanding of law, as even a 14-year-old like myself, not even a resident of the UK, can grasp this concept. This reflects poorly on the UK’s political leadership.

Adoption trauma in my family

Let’s move on, as not all problems are UK-related. A notable example is seen with my younger brother Ilya, who is originally from Ukraine.

When I first met my younger brother, he wasn’t my younger brother yet, but a temporary ward of my parents. He came to our family last year as the war was ongoing in Ukraine. He had lost his biological mother while he was younger, leaving him with his biological father as his last known relative. They lived a happy life in Ukraine, that is until the Russians arrived. His biological father made the choice to protect his son by getting him across the border with Poland, then going to the front to keep my little brother’s homeland safe from the terror that the Russians brought.

As part of the Polish law of March 12, 2022, on assistance to citizens of Ukraine in connection with the armed conflict on the territory of that country, the following applied:

A minor Ukrainian citizen who is staying in the territory of the Republic of Poland unaccompanied by an
adult responsible for them in accordance with the law in force in the Republic of Poland shall be
represented by a temporary guardian, who is also responsible for their person and property.
A temporary guardian, unless otherwise specified in the appointment, shall have the authority to
represent the minor and take care of their person and property. The temporary guardian should obtain
the authorisation of the guardianship court in all important matters concerning the minor’s person or
property.

Supervision over the realization of rights and obligations of a temporary guardian shall be exercised by
a social welfare centre, a social services centre or another organizational unit indicated by a head of
commune or mayor competent for the place of stay of the minor.

A temporary guardian shall be appointed by the guardianship court competent for the place of stay of
the minor, in particular from among relatives, relatives by affinity or other persons providing guarantee
for the due performance of the guardianship duties. The court may appoint a single temporary guardian
for several minors if there is no conflict between their interests. If possible, the court will appoint siblings
the same person as temporary guardian.

Proceedings for the appointment of a temporary guardian shall be initiated upon request or ex officio.
The application can be submitted by:
1) Border Guard;
2) head of the commune, mayor, starost, marshal of the voivodeship;
3) prosecutor;
4) Police;
5) heads of social welfare organisational units referred to in Article 6(5) of the Act of 12 March 2004 on
social welfare;
6) representatives of international organisations or non-governmental organisations providing
assistance to foreigners;
7) person having the actual custody of the minor;
8) person who took actual custody of the minor after the minor entered the territory of the Republic of
Poland and who exercises this custody on the day the application is submitted;
9) other persons or bodies, within the framework of their tasks.

The court shall hear the case without delay, but no later than three days after the application is received
by the court or the court becomes aware of the need to appoint a temporary guardian. A copy of the
order shall be provided by the court to the participants in the proceedings, the competent social welfare
unit and the Commander-in-Chief of the Border Guard. An order appointing a temporary guardian shall
be effective and enforceable upon its publication or, if there has been no publication, upon its delivery.

No fees shall be charged in the proceedings for the appointment of a temporary guardian and the
expenses shall be borne by the State Treasury. The proceedings for the appointment of a temporary
guardian in the scope not regulated by the Act shall be regulated accordingly by the provisions of the
Act of 16 November 1964 – Code of Civil Procedure, except for Article 130.

The Special Act also provides for special arrangements for foster care.

Office for Foreigners of the Republic of Poland

My little brother Ilya is not the only Ukrainian child who came to our family during this difficult time, but most of the others have since left, thankfully being reunited with their biological families. This was a great outcome for them, but it turned out differently for Ilya. His biological father lost his life while defending their homeland, leaving Ilya without any family members. He cried for days on end, and I was the one who tried to comfort him most of the time. I am the only one in my family who speaks Ukrainian well, including my older brother Anton, who is also from Ukraine, and my father, who is also from Ukraine. My older brother is mostly non-verbal, and my father has not spoken Ukrainian since he was a child.

While people often act as if adopting war children is a very supportive act, it doesn’t mean that the children themselves agree. In the case of my little brother, he is the only one of my siblings who does not call our parents his parents, simply because it does not feel the same to him. As I mentioned, the usage of “adoptive parents” does become very noticeable here. On the other hand, he does call me his brother, not like “adoptive brother” or anything similar, which is not due to linguistic reasons, as we do speak English at home, as well as Polish and Russian. As he admits, if it weren’t for the fact that the war took his biological father’s life, he would never have been supportive of the adoption. And I can only agree with that.

This also happens to be another reason for potential trauma, the fact that language is something that is so often overlooked. When I first came to Poland, things were really hard to adjust to, as I didn’t speak the Polish language. However, I had my older sister beside me, so it was a bit easier. When I didn’t feel well, I could talk to her, either in Belarusian or Russian, as we both do speak our native language, regardless of how rare this is for natives of our home country of Belarus. That being said, many children who are adopted arrive alone, as has been the case for all of our siblings, except for the triplet babies, as they are our parents’ biological children.

I can’t truly explain this part, as I don’t have experience here myself. Nor was it the same for any of my siblings compared to what other adoptive children experience. As the truth is, it’s normally common for there to be an existing family, parents with children. Or more specifically, biological children. A major problem that arises is sibling rivalry, which even happens among biological siblings. However, it has a lot more fire when there is the usage of the “blood claim.” And it’s not like this is something that is unique, as I have heard this online from others of around my age who were adopted. It’s a harsh situation, something that can easily destroy adoptions. Even more so as parents are inclined to believe their biological children over their adoptive children, or just one adoptive child over the other, of which there are even examples that reach virality.

The rejection of roots

One such example is the case of Sabrina Caldwell, born as Lubov Makoedova on February 5, 1988, in Russia. She became available for adoption due to the death of her father and the termination of her mother’s parental rights. A healthy girl, though diagnosed with “oligophrenia in the stage of debility, uncomplicated.” This diagnosis is no longer in use today, but it means she had an intellectual disability that deteriorated over time. I will add that this is not uncommon among orphans, with the deterioration often being reversed after adoption and receiving loving care. Her adoption papers further stated that she was a girl who was “open, tender, obedient, and friendly.”

She became world news when her adoptive parents claimed she was dangerous, even capable of murder, with the allegation that she tried to kill her younger brother. This was all seen in the CBS true-crime series 48 Hours, in which Troy Roberts presented the entire story from all sides. Eventually, Sabrina was returned to Russia, to a psychiatric hospital.

After looking at the episode, which has been available on the CBS News website since November 19, 2022, and the 48 Hours YouTube channel since June of 2023, I can’t help but side with Sabrina quite easily, as the adoptive parents showed a clear lack of care, love, or anything good towards her.

One notable example is the renaming of Sabrina. As I said, she was born as Lubov, meaning “love” in English, which is a beautiful Russian name, but her adoptive parents renamed her to “Caralee.” Renaming children against their will is known to cause a rift in the child’s relationship with the parents. This is especially notable in adoption, where this very often happens.

I can even speak from experience here, as I was renamed myself from my birth name, although for the reason to protect me from my biological father. My biological mother renamed me and my siblings shortly after we arrived in Poland. This is the reason why my older biological sister has a truly Polish name, Katarzyna. It’s not something I always felt happy about, still don’t always, which is why I still use my old name with friends I have in Belarus. It’s still a part of who I am, as simple as it may seem.

Similarly, when it comes to what we see in the adoptive parents’ home, there is nothing remotely Russian. We all have our identity before adoption, and it’s not something that adoptive parents should be breaking apart. It’s like I still dance, as I did before the adoption. It’s part of who I am. And needing to let go of it can cause trauma.

There is so much more that could be said, but it comes down to the same thing. The parents wanted the perfect child through adoption, which is simply not possible. But it is something that is very common in adoption, and a major cause for the trauma that many adoptive children experience.

Not autism

When it comes to adoption, there is also this image of children being very withdrawn and self-absorbed, like a stereotypical image of autism. This is, however, not autism. This is a condition known as RAD, reactive attachment disorder. This is a condition that is caused by maltreatment, including neglect and abuse. Children with this condition can be fearful of their caregivers, even in situations where the caregivers are loving and caring.

A major problem regarding this condition that is common among those who have been in the care system is that it is a lifelong condition, not something that just goes away. The idea that giving love or having therapy will make it go away is incorrect. And with the common symptoms, it’s something that could cause trauma or even make it worse. Some of the possible symptoms include:

• Withdrawn behavior
• Avoidance of eye contact
• Difficulty showing or receiving affection
• Difficulty in social interactions
• Failure to seek comfort
• Excessive emotionality
• Inappropriately distrustful or fearsome
• Attention-seeking behavior

The reason I am telling you this is because it is related to the next problem in regards to adoption.

Adoption lies

A few years ago, the Russo-Ukrainian Foundation “Change One Life” had a novel idea in Russia: create an orphan database with videos. However, that wasn’t the end of it…

It’s crucial to address another issue surrounding adoption: boys are far less likely to be adopted. In Russia and Ukraine, being an 8-year-old boy or older means that adoption is extremely uncommon, barely happening at all.

Now, let me introduce you to what the Russian side of the Change One Life Foundation likes to promote as their greatest success, the Twin Souls Project:

You’ll no longer hear about it, not even if you live in Russia, as it’s often touted as a huge success despite the stark reality being quite different.

One of the most significant issues surrounding adoption is that a considerable portion of adoptions fall apart. Recall what I stated about our Polish government’s stance on adoption:

Adoption is an irreversible inclusion of a child into a family;

MINISTRY OF FAMILY AND SOCIAL POLICY OF THE REPUBLIC OF POLAND

This statement is inaccurate. Many adoptions are eventually reversed due to various reasons. When I inquired among an adoption community I am part of, nearly all adoptees reported experiencing this, with nearly all who were adopted internationally confirming three or more adoptions before finding their “forever family.” “Forever” … If only. (The highest number was 21 adoptions…)

The Change One Life Foundation has experienced the same pattern. While it’s true that adoption numbers surged following their Twin Souls Project, about 85% were ultimately returned by the adoptive parents. This statistic was provided by the Change One Life Foundation itself. A stunning commercial, but not the result it should have had.

And this is particularly significant when you consider the impact this has on children. While we frequently criticize orphanages, also known as children’s homes, what is the alternative? The answer is foster care, which faces the exact same issues.

Foster care

When it comes to foster care, we repeatedly witness children being rehomed. Their entire lives are often packed into a single bag, sometimes even a trash bag. This harsh reality speaks volumes about the state of the world when children are forced to move constantly with their possessions in a trash bag. Such treatment is undeserving of any child, yet it remains a prevalent reality.

The consequence of this constant upheaval is that these children often emerge with deeper emotional scars, either transitioning into adulthood with limited support systems or, if fortunate enough, securing adoption and escaping the cycle of relocation. The proposed solution to this issue is the rebranding of children’s homes as “family homes,” implying that they are merely alternative living arrangements, not institutions of institutionalization.

The problem of failed foster care and adoption is compounded in foster care settings, as children in these systems are more susceptible to experiencing both. The experience of being discarded by multiple adults can be profoundly traumatizing for a child, a fact that I can attest to from personal experience. It is crucial that people develop a deeper understanding of this issue.

The greatest source of adoption trauma

The most severe form of adoption trauma stems from a combination of factors, including family separation, early adoption, and severance from biological roots. Even when adoptees cannot consciously recall these experiences, a deep-seated yearning for their biological heritage persists within them. While there are various explanations for this phenomenon, it ultimately comes down to personal belief. However, there is no doubt that this yearning exists.

I have refrained from discussing the most significant aspect of this topic until now, as it is not one I have personally experienced. It is a subject that should be addressed by those who have firsthand knowledge of it. However, I can share an anecdote that illustrates the complexities involved.

Not as simple as you might suppose

For several months, my family have been fostering a young boy whose mother was undergoing rehabilitation for alcohol and drug abuse. When it comes to fostering and adopting, the cardinal rule is to avoid overwhelming the child, as this can lead to negative outcomes. However, I impulsively gave the boy a hug. Why did I do it? I have no idea.

Predictably, my parents were initially upset with me for overwhelming him. I felt guilty and cried myself to sleep. However, that was not the end of the story. In the middle of the night, I awoke to find the boy standing at my bedroom door. I pretended to be asleep to observe his reaction. He gently closed the door and lay down on the floor with his blanket. Unable to bear the pretense any longer, I helped him onto my bed and we fell asleep together. My surprised parents discovered us in the morning.

Conclusion

The reason I’m sharing this is because of what I started this post with – adoption being seen as either a trauma or a saving grace, while the reality is that it can be both. There’s a genuine need for the darker sides of adoption to be more widely known, so that adoptions aren’t used as a means of achieving viral fame, but rather for what even the law defines it as: bringing a child and potential caregivers together when it’s in the best interests of the child. This last part needs a lot more attention, as it’s the primary cause of the trauma that many adoptions create.

We’re quick to simply place a child in foster care or institutional care, with the possibility of adoption later, even though this is far too often not in the best interests of the child. We need a greater understanding that situations like parental alcohol and drug abuse, as well as neglect, can be addressed without the need to separate the child and their parent(s). Especially when alcohol and drugs can be prevented from falling into the hands of parents by making them much harder to obtain. We need a greater understanding that parental separation is incredibly damaging for children, especially young children. And we need to make laws much clearer and more effective so that trauma caused by adoption can be entirely prevented, as it should already have been.

However, we mustn’t let this happen at the expense of making adoption impossible altogether. There are still many adoptees like myself who have benefited from adoption and don’t view it as a traumatic experience. Yes, I would prefer adoption to be a much shorter process with a lot fewer hoops to jump through, as it currently stands, it’s a complete mess. The statement that adoption is about “buying a child” also exists, and it’s caused by the insane way adoption is currently handled. This again demonstrates how little attention is given to putting a child’s best interests first. If you asked me what my ideal parent would be like, I would describe my (adoptive) father, with the most important characteristic being that he is autistic, just like me. Despite the many autistic children awaiting adoption worldwide, many potential adoptive parents who are themselves autistic are being rejected due to outdated and discriminatory adoption practices.

What we really need is for the adoption system to be overhauled in numerous ways, with all affected parties being able to have their say, including children themselves. It’s ridiculous that you need to be 13 in most parts of the world to have any voice, regardless of how arbitrary this age is. The foster boy I mentioned, whose name I still can’t share due to privacy, is nonverbal and can’t speak in words, but he can still express his preferences. For instance, when I come home, he’s always waiting for me and gives me a hug. It’s become a regular practice, and we both enjoy it. It shows his affection without the need for words. It shows his preference, even though he’s just six years old and severely disabled, a boy who would be completely unheard by the world if it were up to the legal system.

That’s what I really want to conclude this post with: just because things may appear black and white, they’re often much more complex. We need to stop pretending we know everything and be open to the unexpected.