I was surprised by Ms. B.G. Bower's angry piece in the Summer 2001 Bastard Quarterly (Birthmother as Professional Victim, Vol. 5, Issue 2.) It's difficult to determine whether Bower is more angry at birthmothers for their wanton sexual behavior or for "choosing" to place their children for adoption. Sharing neither prejudice, Bastard Nation's mission statement states "we see nothing shameful in having been born out of wedlock or in being adopted."
Bower, who states she believes in biblical morality, expresses herself more like a cross burning holier-than-thou religious zealot than one who understands the meaning of the words forgiveness and kindness. Emotionally crippled by her inability to get beyond anger at her birthmother who refused her contact, she lashes out at all birthmothers. Are only adoptees allowed to be angry and express it? Does the lack of choice of adoptees make the whining of some who can't find their birthparents or don't like the ones they find, acceptable? Does infertility and/or unexpected adoption outcomes negate some adoptive parents who may be either angry or whine about their misfortunes? How about an athlete who chose to participate in a sport that left him a cripple?
Because adoption represents a loss for all parties (loss of fertility and progeny, loss of original family, loss of child), anger is a very natural by-product for all involved. Like other emotions, especially those that are involved in stages of grief and loss, anger can be used productively. Feeling anger, expressing it (even when it may appear to some as whining) and moving through it is a healthy and necessary step for anyone to move from victim to survivor. It's when we get stuck in our anger that it becomes pathologically unhealthy for ourselves and for those around us. Many great movements such as MADD were started by one woman's anger at the unnecessary loss of her beloved child. Some of these mothers' children chose to drive or be in a car with drunk driver, despite their parents' warnings. Does their parents' righteous anger at the unnecessary loss of life and desire to change legislation make them whining victims? Yes, it is important that we take responsibility for our actions. Yes, some people get hung up in playing victim. Having to confront cruel statements such "Any dog can give birth..." often creates an automatic self-defense mechanism and a reply that tries to defends our position and explain why it happened, which might appear to be saying "Hey, it wasn't really my fault."
Excluding rape victims and those who may have abused their children and had them removed, her article is specifically addressed to "young, unmarried" birthmothers. She does not state what era or age and makes no distinction or allowances for changing mores, such as the fact that pregnant young women, and mothers with their babies, were not always allowed to remain in school as they are today. She just clumps all birthmothers into one pathetic human garbage pile. Many young birthmothers, if their parents allowed them to, had to choose between an education, or remaining on the bottom rung of society, unable to support themselves or their child. A damned-if-you-do, and damned-if-you-don't situation. In the absence of any formal sex education or even health classes, those who came of age in the 1960's learned what little we knew about sex from whispers in school hallways and the courtyard. Many of us did not know how babies were conceived (and I grew up in New York!) and we believed tales of toilet seat and swimming pool conceptions. Date rape had was not identified as a crime until relatively recently. Many, many a birthmother was victimized in this way and has lived with the blame, the shame, and the consequence of losing her child.
Other women had rings on their fingers or the promise of marriage. Is it whining to have expected promises to be kept and to have disappointment about contracts reneged? What of the men who had extra-marital sexual relations with all these women? Our social mores impose no lifelong shame or punishment for their part in the sin. With the exception of cultures where women are married at puberty, the vast majority of young people have pre-marital sex. The United States has the highest teen pregnancy rate of any industrialized country. We are plagued by fanatics who want to impose their unrealistic sexual morality on others. Our cultural mores present a confusing message to youngsters busting with normal, healthy, natural sexual curiosity. Good girls are admonished to postpone sex until marriage and postpone marriage until after college, perhaps even after grad school and an established career. They are told to "Just say no" while being bombarded with sex from every form of media. Those who make it through their teens and young adulthood without an out-of-wedlock pregnancy are in no way better or more righteous, than those who didn't. Most were just luckier or used the Bill and Monica method of avoiding "sex."
Once pregnant, a minor did not have choices, especially not in the days of "Father Knows Best". Some were imprisoned in their own homes or sent away for incarceration in cruel unwed mother homes. In either case the only hope of redemption was "choosing" adoption. Abortions were illegal in the 1960's, and are now highly restricted and costly.
Many birthmothers I've met or corresponded with in my two-decades plus of running a support group, were told that they would have been thrown out in the street if they didn't do what they were told. A choice between doing what you're told or living in the streets is not a choice. Choice requires viable options. They were young, frightened, confused, filled with shame, very vulnerable, poor and powerless. Ricki Solinger, a sociologist (not a social worker, and with no connection whatsoever to adoption) explains in Wake up Little Susie: Race and Single Pregnancy before Roe v Wade that a birthmother's loss of a child to adoption had far less to do with her morals or her personal choices than it had to do with her social standing and race. Good, nice, white girls did not know about welfare, nor were they told about it.
I was not very young, nor was I legally unwed. Nor was I raped. Nor was my child taken from me. There are a multitude of scenarios which do not fit the stereotypical "young, unwed mother". Once one approaches an adoption agency just to inquire, there is little escaping with babe in arms. They are very persuasive. Instead of offering family counseling, temporary shelter or employment training, expectant mothers are told over and over how selfish it would be to keep their child, as if being single and/or poor at this moment meant they would always be. Some, not all, birthmothers have every right to be angry at what they have come to realize were unnecessary losses of their children. Many, both here and abroad, were unjustly swindled out of their babies to fill a market demand and to keep the adoption industry flourishing. Using undo pressure and lies to obtain a signature of relinquishment is illegal. Should one not be angry when crimes were committed and we cannot reclaim stolen children? Or did the sluts get what they deserve for having sex to begin with? Is it justifiable punishment for the sin of sex to expect young girls to return to home and school "as if nothing happened" with no opportunity to grieve their loss? Perhaps whining is the only thing they have left that wasn't taken from them. Did we all deserve to grieve in silence the rest of our lives on our child's birthday, every day, denied the right to know if he or she were dead or alive? Should I not be angry at the adoptive mother who intentionally kept me from knowing about the death of the daughter she thanked me for giving her?
Birthmothers live with a double bind. We make what we are told is the best and right choice. We are pressured to give away the evidence of our sin in order to erase the sin of fornication as if it never happened. We comply, knowing we have brought shame on our family. Then, after the fact, we discover that there are people who think less of us for not fighting harder to keep our children, and this perpetuates the very guilt that torments us for the rest of our lives. Until you walk in my shoes do not tell me about victimization. It is not whining or playing victim, but rather perfectly appropriate to rage against the system. I am rightfully angry and seek social change of a system that judges who is fit to be a mother and who is not. Why is it that some single working mothers (e.g. Calista Flockhart, Rosie O'Donnell) are accepted but poor ones are trashed?
We all make mistakes and if God can forgive us, surely you can find it in your heart to forgive some mistakes -- even if people "knew better."
Mirah Riben
Monmouth, New Jersey
(This feature appeared in the Winter 2002 issue of the Bastard Quarterly.)
Copyright 2002 Mirah Riben
All Rights Reserved