Maryanne Cohen sent the following as a comment to Bad Day in Illinois, regarding the passage of HB 5428. I posted it there, but thought it was so good, and voices what many of us feel right now, I am posting it, with Maryanne’s permission, as a separate guest blog.
I am working on a long piece on Illinois and not sure when it will be finished. There is much to say about this travesty.
I am so disgusted over IL signing a terribly deformed bill into law, and all these other bad bills popping up like warts all over the country. This has really made me understand the term “Adoption Deformer” used by some to describe the people who push these bills.
What is deformed?
The notion that convoluted compromise bills are “fair” and consider the “conflicting rights” of adoptees and birhparents. This ignores the fact that birthparents gave up ALL rights around the adoptee when they signed a surrender. There are no “conflicting rights” until deformed bills with vetoes write them into law. Some Deformers have the nerve to say bad bills are “better” than clean ones, and to eagerly offer to advertise them far and wide so closet mommies can file their vetoes!
What is deformed?
The “we will fix it next year” delusion. Yes, your group may come back year after year in an attempt to fix a bad bill, only to find that the legislators have lost all interest. “We already addressed that issue” will be their answer for many years to come. No Deformed bill that passed has EVER been fixed. There are NO “baby steps,” just one big step
over a cliff for those adoptees left behind by deformed bills.
What is deformed?
The “adoptee’s (sic) are dyin'” argument that mixes medical records and sentimental reunions with open records. This leads directly to unworkable schemes to extort medical information from mothers who do not wish contact, and medical registries rather than adoptee rights. “After all, isn’t medical history you greatest concern?” says Mr Legislator?
What is deformed?
“My state is DIFFERENT” hence only deformed legislation can pass here, and it all our opposition’s fault.” All states are different, but in those where deformed legislation has been introduced it has been fought just as vigorously as clean legislation by our usual enemies, NCFA, the Catholic Bishops, ACLU, Right To Life, LDS etc. Deformed legislation does not appease our opponents. Deformed legislation comes not from them, but from “our side”, Deformers who are all to eager to lie down and concede rights in the hope of getting something/anything passed.
What is deformed?
“It helps the majority, only 1% left behind.” First of all, nobody really knowns what percentage of adoptees will be blacklisted in any given scheme, so the numbers thrown around are suspect. On the other hand, Deformers have an “if it saves just one” mentality about legislation that makes it easier for any percentage of adoptees to get records and search, because search is really all they are about, not rights.
When you are the one barred from getting your records because of the year you were born falling into a black hole, or because of a veto. it is cold comfort that the majority got theirs, and it is NOT A RIGHT. It is permission from Mommy, insulting to adopted adults and to birthmothers who see their grown children as autonomous adults.
Yes, I am disgusted by Deformers. With friends like that we do not need enemies.
So roughly 1% of adult adoptees will be forbidden from receiving their own OBCs because of the vetoes.
How can adoptees celebrate this new amended law when Illinois continues to discriminate against even one adopted citizen?
In this instance Deformed equals Discrimination.
What name is there for those who do nothing but complain about the work of others?
What bill have YOU MaryAnne Cohen, or BN introduced? What were the results?
Unless you work WITH activists within a state, what right do you have to complain after the fact?
I have said this elsewhere and will say it again: If you, Marley or BN wants the right to bitch about unclean bills, where is the help? All I see and here from BN regarding legislation are these bitch fests when a bill gets passed that BN doesn’t approve of.
** I do not see BN introducing their own bills or assisting anyone with model legislation or any other educational materials.***
None of this says that I approve of any compromises – I DO NOT!
** I support FULL EQUALITY and always have!**
But I do not denigrate others’ efforts when I have done nothing to introduce a clean bill. I am not in the trenches and feel i have no right to denigrate others’ hard work.
The movement lacks a real national umbrella org that fully supports FULL EQUALITY and leads and states’ efforts – not one to sit back and then put them down after the fact, IMHO. And I am not unaware that to do that requires more $$ and volunteers than BN has. One person cannot do it all! But, why not **put up or shut up?**
Who do include in your “deformer label” — people like Triona Guadry who it seemed to me worked her ass off against a bill introduced by a legislator (as far as I know)??? What did YOU do?
So what name can we call the BITCHERS; the do-nothing, johnny-come-lately moaners and groaners?
I will now duck and hide as I am labeled something negative and attacked.
P.S. What adoptees are “celebrating” in IL?
Anon, the “One percent” figure has been thrown around, but nobody really knows how many vetoes will be filed, There are no good statistics on this, or anything else to do with adoption.
Agree that “Deformed Equals Discrimination.” It does not matter how many adoptees ask for their OBC, how many search or want to, or how many vetoes are filed or not. All adoptees should be able to request and get their OBC if they want it , with no restrictions, or it is not a right.
Anon, we have no idea what the final percentage of screwed poor Bastards will be.
Nor is anyone building any system whereby to track them.
Barring that, we won’t know.
I have long been an opponent of the idea of “baby steps,” “contact vetoes through the state” and “taking what we can get” as ideas of making progress in open records legislation. I just doesn’t compute.
Only on one issue do we disagree. When we were either coerced into surreder or (and a few did) surrendered willingly, we surrendered our “parental rights and responsibilities” ONLY. Our rights as private citizens and human beings were not on the table then and are not on the table now. We are not just names on an OBC. We are real people who are protected under our constitution along with everyone else. No mother signed away those rights to the same kind of privacy that every other person in this country should have according to the constitution.
But, as I have said before, the decision to have or not have a relationship can be handled by the adults involved. State interference is unnecessary and smacks of Big Brother.
No real disagreement, Robin. We gave up parental rights. We gave up the right to raise our children. That is very specific. I do not think we were given “privacy” from out children ever knowing who we are, but other kinds of privacy that all people have did not enter into it one way or the other.
I assume you mean the medical records thing, which to me is not a big deal, but I do not see it as part of access to OBCs which has nothing to do with medical records nor should it. That is a whole different issue. And yes, relationships or not can be worked out by the adults involved without state or agency or other assistance.
For those who overstep their boundaries, there are already laws on the books about stalkers and threats. No need for special laws for adoptees or birthparents on this issue.
You make excellent points, Maryanne.
I also agree with your response to Robin that in spite of the fact that mothers are “real people and not just names on the OBC” and protected along with everyone else – clean open access bills should have nothing to do with mother’s rights to anything.
I am also one of many first mothers who also believes this is about adoptees rights ONLY.
I do not feel the need as a mother to insist upon recognition for my loss while also supporting an adopted person’s right to their OBC. Period.
One has nothing to do with the other, nor was the medical records issue part of the Illinois bill.
If people really mean what they say when they claim to support clean legislation, they don’t want to complicate the issue by bringing up mother’s rights at all or it creates doubt in the minds of legislators to support the basic premise that adoptees deserve to have a copy of their OBC should they want it.
Tsk, Tsk, Tsk, Carol..
I see you are still chomping away on that bone of yours.
Some people just always have to have the last word, the so-called authoritative last word…no matter what. Evidently you are in good company. Strange Bedfellows, yes?
To BD…sorry for hi-jacking, I was compelled by God!
Yes, Maryanne, I am speaking about medical, psyco-social and any other issues that mothers might have that are no one’s business but their own. Unfortunately, when the rights of one segment of the population are seen as supersceding the rights of another, then there is a problem.
I am also in firm agreement that this is not about medical histories and reunions, but about a person’s right to know their identity and beginnings. THAT I do support. But, just as no one looks out after the adopted but adoptees with a few moms thrown in, so no one looks out after the mothers who make up the majority of the EMS but those mothers.
I cannot just leave our concerns by the wayside. Who was it that said “One person’s rights end where another’s begins?” I am not a martyr or sacrificing kind of mom. That does not mean that I do not support the adoptee’s right to their OBC. I do, wholeheartedly. It just means that I think mothers’ concerns need some support, as well.
We look at these “dirty” bills and see the assumption of some specious kind of “protection” for the natural mother, but, if you look closer, we are also being tossed under the bus. If we don’t look out for ourselves in this, who will?
Still, I commend the post you wrote.
Exactly, Carolc. Mother’s rights and adoptee rights are totally separate issues.
Thanks for the good word, Attila the Mom. I have an Attila the cat who turned out to be female:-)We now call her just Tilla.
Mirah, you admit you are not in the trenches, yet you feel free to criticize those who are of nothing but complaining.
Bastard Nation is very clear in our mission: we do not accept compromise, and we will fight it on every front. So, why does everybody get upset when we follow-through with our word? Should we do any different? A person or organization is only as good as its word. Deformers have proven to have no “word.” We take our mission seriously. Thus, much of our time is taken up with trying to kill their good bills gone bad–or bad bills from the start . Why play nice with those who betray their alleged mission and throw their constituency under the train? Why play nice with those who acquiesce to the enemy’s arguments and language “adopting” it as their own to get something passed? Why play nice to those who “educate” legislators with fuzzy inaccurate messages? This is politics, not sentimental relationships. This is class war, not a country club dance.
Deformers have made it quite clear they do not want our assistance, so the point is moot. Deformers were hardly enthusiastic about working with us in Oregon and Alabama. Helen Hill was shut out from the mainstream organizations there until the very end and the AAC (as an organization) donated a whopping $100. BN was “ruining” the movement. To the best of my memory, no one helped us in Alabama (which you seem to have forgotten judging from comments on FB). We were a major player in the informal New Hampshire coalition with Janet Allen in the NH House (not to mention her contacts). Yes, there were compromise individuals, but they were defeated and all NH bastards won in the end. Our ideology is what pulled Maine through, though we were not active there as an organization (but some members were). Our assistance was welcomed in South Dakota this year.
Don’t get me started on deformer attempts to disempower clean local organizations.See, “we” don’t understand. Our state is different. Our legislators are different. Our state constitution is different. Of course, all states are different, but principles and ethics are not twisted to fit those differences. Strategies are built around those differences.
There is a clear proven record that diverse states will open their records through perseverance, honestly and a refusal to give in. Organizations are built inside states, strong relationships built with sponsors and supporters who understand the issue. Bad bills are pulled. Principles are not thrown away for expediency. No sympathy should be wasted on those who sell out their constituency for “something.”
Since you are not in the trenches you have no idea that we actually do work with activists in states. We are not liberal deformers who put our business on main street. We are working in a couple states right now. We have financially supported campaigns. We were very active in the California fiasco and are the major partner of CalOpen, one of only a handful of state groups today which stand on the principle of leave no one behind. BN, Illinois Open and The Illinois Coalition (not affiliated with us) were the only non-compromising organizations to fight Sara Feigenholtz. I didn’t see anybody else jump into it.
Finally, I don’t know why you have to drag Maryanne into this. She has a very long record of work on behalf of adoptee rights and adoption reform. She was with NJ folks for years, attending and testifying at hearings, etc, until the group sold out.
I was going to write more, but this should be sufficient.
Who’s celebrating? Beats me except for Mellisha Mitchell’s daughter according to the press. Something I’m trying to write about, but it’s taking forever.
In response to Mirah’s questioning my credentials to “bitch” about bad bills:
I was a member of the NJ adoption reform legislative committee for many years, all through the 90s and until they began to introduce compromised legislation some time in the 00’s. I went to weekly meetings in Morristown with Jane Nast, Pam Hasegawa, Betsy Forrest and others where we plotted strategy, stuffed envelopes, and discussed ways to get through to the politicians in Trenton. I was part of this committee when we pulled a bill that legislators had deformed to be proactive only, not retroactive.
I testified in Trenton several times. I wrote letters to newspapers. I did some interviews, and visited legislators offices.
I did not “do nothing but complain”. I have every right to comment on current legislation, having paid my dues to adoption reform here for at least 20 years. As a concerned citizen, I especially have a right and duty to comment about bills in my own state of NJ, and bills in other states that may influence legislation here.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Exactly, Carolc. Mother’s rights and adoptee rights are totally separate issues.
Chris and Robin, this is really getting tedious.
For literally months now, simply because I as a first mother, disagreed with you and Sandy about the fact that an adopted person’s right to their obc is a TOTALLY SEPARATE ISSUE from the rights of first mothers; you continue to make snarky, snarling comments or accuse me of being a “know it all” or brown nosing someone! Grow up ladies. Seriously.
Why you choose to misintrepret and twist everything I or other bmoms you disagree with say to try to discredit us, is becoming pathetic.
First and foremost – don’t you understand WHAT you claim to be supporting when you say you want a “Clean Bill”? When you throw terms around and quote Marley, you are implying you agree that an adoptee’s right to an unfettered copy of their OBC ethically and morally have nothing to do with mothers. Yep. That’s a fact! A clean bill should have nothing to do with medical history or anything else having to do with a mother’s right to privacy. Why keep bringing that up?
Don’t you read anyone else’s blogs but your own? Mothers who have been around much longer than you working on reform, all agree that yes, our rights in many cases were violated when they took our children using coercive tactics and worse, but that it is inappropriate to ask for any kind of rights or justice for us us ALONG WITH these open access bills for adoptees. You might believe they should, but then they wouldn’t be “clean bills”. That is what Maryanne is trying to tell you. Illinios is now not clean legislatiobecause the rights to a mothers privacy was inappropriately agreed to in this case in the form of a contact veto.
Now since you cannot seem to grasp the fact that mothers like Maryanne, Lorraine, Jane E. Mirah and numerous others that you have been critical of, all share the same belief as Maryanne’s quote above. One issue has nothing to do with the other and to bring up our mistreatment during testimony in support of these bills – just creates a problem.
I don’t need to brown nose anyone ladies. I’ve been in the trenches as well. I was involved with bills in Connecticut (that died)and two of Pennylvanis’s bills and testified on behalf of adoptees on several occasions. So I do know a tad bit more than you, with all due respect about this issue.
The last thing these hearings need is a whiney mother saying “we were treated poorly too”… at a time when it is crucial for us to be supportive.
What is it about that that is so confusing to you?
This is not to say that mother’s rights aren’t JUST AS IMPORTANT, girls… but not at that time. And anyway, why aren’t you 3 members of SMAAC who make fun of every mother mentioned above behind the scenes, out speaking to legislators and in the trenches rather than constantly running your mouths after the fact about what went wrong?
Lastly, intelligent people can express different opinions without having to have a last word or brown nosing or even name calling like you do, Robin. Do you see one other person on their blogs that doesn’t allow opposing points of view? Of course not. Just you. If anyone disagrees, they’re blasted and outsted. You do not allow debate on yours, yet you read at others blogs and then are critical behind their backs on your own blog, rather than being straight up.
Chris – I thought more of you than this kind of catty stuff. That’s all I’ll say. Robin – you can continue to say whatever nasty comments you choose about me and other moms who share my point of view, but if you are so correct about all this, why aren’t more people agreeing with you?
Part II, Sorry, for the lengthy reply Marley, but I appreciate the opportunity to
respond to these accusatory comments with no basis in fact, just as you and Maryanne were able to do.
In summary Chris and Robin, stop personalizing everything. These are political issues and many of us will be on different sides of the fence at different times. This isn’t a high school sorority and I have every right to disagree with you. Learn to accept it or quit calling yourselves adoption activists. Actually, I realize you call yourself only “Senior Mother Activists”, so why keep bringing your nasty comments to sites where most of us are working on adoption REFORM… ? Yep, I know you hate that word but it is what it is… While I am a mother of the BSE, I support ALL mothers of adoption loss, in spite of the fact that you accuse those of us who do so as being disloyal. And yes, I support adoptees rights as well – a totally different issue, so get over yourselves.
I also strongly suggest you keep your personal beef with me off public blogs and forums. If you don’t, I will continue to respond in kind and I can assure you it won’t be “brown nosing” … (what a stupid and childish comment, geez)
Thanks for posting my comment, Marley.
“A person or organization is only as good as its word.”
I respectfully disagree. I think talk is cheap and we are judged by our ACTIONS.
It’s a great goal and it’s mine as well that adoptees have full equality. But I do not work legislatively and thus do not BITCH about those who do!
What has BN actually DONE…as in succeeded in legislatively? Not your fault, Marley…it takes more than one person! You can’t do it all and you put a lot of time into baby dumps – a fight that has been LOST as now every state has them!
I am far from the only one who feels this was BTW. On Facebook some adoptees have asked “What is BN” – presumably newer to this movement, but what is Bn doing to get their name and the word out on their position. You can’t just HAVE a mission!
To see others who agree, see the comments to my blog post:
As I said, I find it sad… just as I have AAC and CUB being ineffective… I mean they each do what they do., AAC is good, i suppose at hosting conferences, if one sees that as end in itself then they are doing something. CUB, I GUESS offers support.
But I’m a lifetime member of BN (unless I’ve been kicked out) and have not gotten a newsletter or an “action alert” or any word from them in I cannot remember how long! A national org needs to DO more than just have a blog or a website….and complain about others doing it wrong.
Marley, you say IL refused your help, but Mary Anne said on my blog it happened too fast for you to help. Which is it? If your help was refused, what help did you offer to who and who specifically refused?
Nuff said…I do not dragging this dirty laundry out in public. we have real enemies to fight, not one another…
Well Carol, then I would suggest you do the same. You have followed those of us against whom you seem to bear a grudge all over the net, posting in such a way as to challenge everything that is said just because of who said it. Your anger management is not doing well, now is it? I don’t know what turned you into an enemy, but I am not the only one who is sick of watching you cozy up to everyone you can think of while being casually (and you might think, subtly but it shows) nasty to the few of us. Your change of attitude came out of the blue and you left a couple of us, at first, astounded, then hurt, then pissed and wondering what was in it for you. If you could live and let live, then no one would have objected to whatever you felt you needed to do for yourself. But you have declared open warfare. Not a very anti-anger thing to do.
We will continue to voice our opinions about these legislations and how they affect mothers and you can’t stop us. I suppose it’s ok to be snide, critical and even hateful just as long as it’s not “angry?”
I would submit that your actions in the past few months have been very “middle school” in nature. You need to grow up. I’ll call it like I see it.
Civilized people can agree on some issues, disagree on others. It should not be about personalities or brand loyalty. Someone agreeing with my statement on a specific issue does not make them a “brown noser” or my best buddy. Conversely, someone disagreeing does not make them a traitor, stupid, or an enemy. People disagree, and express opinions, hopefully in a decent way. I happen to agree with what Carolc wrote in her last comments.
I agree with all the people who have written a comment hers on some issues, disagree on others. That is fine. I try to respond to ideas, not personalities.
Robin, I appreciate your agreement on this issue, but question your going to other blogs like this one and making some very snarky comments, when you never print a disagreeing comment on your own blog. That is certainly your right, but then why spend so much time obliquely replying to unprinted comments by unnamed individuals? Why not stick with your issues for Senior Mothers Only? Those who agree with your agenda will join you, others will not. And those who read your blog would have a better idea what you are talking about without all the veiled references and insider jargon.
One last comment in reply to Robin who apparantly feels the need to give me one of her infamous tongue lashings…
I never said you’re not entitled to anger, so why you and your couple of SMAAC buddies keep insisting that I told you it was wrong,is beyond me.
I’ve also never denied at times being angry myself;but as I’ve explained privately ad nauseum,I choose to do what I feel is most productive with the anger I have. Your tacky comments on your blog that people have shared with me, such as “someone who had a serious illness still doesn’t have the right to tell us we shouldn’t be angry”.
The reality is that you and Sandy took issue with the simple, comment I made that I had decided since I had breast cancer and beat it, I was going to choose my battles. In MY opinion,fighting for restitution and an apology for senior mothers mistreatment,is no longer a top priority for me. So sue me. Why do you and Sandy constantly have to bring up my illness and imply that I’m angry too, or whatever the hell type of point you’re attempting to make?
What I choose to do with my life, my anger, my political beliefs etc are none of your freakin’ business, Miss Snarkmouth! Nor do I have to defend them. You contstantly write that mothers who do not agree to fight for Senior Mother rights are filled with guilt, are weak, stupid and other childish terms. You laugh at mothers you insist are filled with angst if they discuss reunion issues. You insist your past any reunion issues..
It’s been years since I’ve felt any guilt about my relationship with my son, because unlike some, I’ve had years of therapy and counseling with and about my son. I just plain old disagree with you – why do you always have to play armchair shrink and character assassinate people who disagree with you.
An apology for the wrongdoing that was inflicted on me when I lost my son wouldn’t even really mean much IMHO because the perps are dead and gone. Or they’re my parents. or society and I’m willing to grow up and see the glass as half full and fight for other things that I feel have a greater chance of getting accomplished. That includes adoptees unconditional right to their OBC.
You say I hurt you somehow – so here’s the real poop – I got sick of the behind the scenes banal gossip fest that SMAAC became. The running to other people’s blogs and facebook adoptee pages and then posting how much you hate these people – the insistance that all adoptees consider us sluts and whores. It felt like grade school there was no activism – just gossip and putdowns of anyone who felt differently than the small handful of active SMAAC members. FMC is exactly the same thing – people who discussed feelings were ignored. Anyone who ever expressed a different point of view was treated as a traitor. Well guess what? I don’t and never did have time for “mean girl games”. Nor quite frankly, has any adoptee or anyone called me a slut or whore, and if they did I certainly wouldn’t make it the basis for my activism to call attention to the way the majority of first mothers were treated during the BSE!
I choose to call attention to my experience with dignity. Eventually I realized SMAAC and FMC was not a good fit for me. Get over it! You turned on the women of Origins USA and insisted that since BSE was their term, you would come up with your own – EMS -just for spite! So fine – I think the whole thing is silly – I am a feminist and I stand up for all women’s rights including the young moms that you dislike because you insist they didn’t suffer the way we did. That’s just bullshit Robin.
I’m not alone in these assessments either. I had adoptee friends writing to me because they had attempted to explain to you on your blog that they saw things differently and you blasted them, just because they disagree with you.
(Part II – the end)
Lastly, stop feeding your own ego -I don’t follow you or anyone around the net. If you mean Yahoo Answers and FB; I was there long before you! Say whatever you want about what you believe, but stop trying to make this into some kind of war just because I disagree with you. That’s not anger or some kind of grudge, that’s just life and I have every right to express it everywhere I choose.
If you want to have another last word,the soapbox is all yours. I’m just glad to have had a public forum to tell you what I think since I was one of the people banned from posting my opinion in defense of myself against your irrational assumptions, on your blog.
I’m done with your silliness.
IL does NOT have a Contact Veto, and Carol, you really need to learn the difference between a contact veto and a disclosure veto. A disclosure veto, which IL has, doesn’t criminalize contact between family members, and if a contact is made in the same manner that it has been under sealed records, no one will be prosecuted, which a Contact Veto does.
Secondly, since our disagreement, I have not posted in response to one single thing you have written on any place. However, you deemed it necessary to bring my name into your disagreement and I am outraged. Please don’t flatter YOUR self that you are the only mother I have come up against who is angry or has faced a life-threatening illness! Get over yourself! And, in future, please leave MY name out of YOUR nastiness.
By the way, as I recall, the disagreement was more about your singling us out for criticism on Facebook than about other disagrements….just sayin’. And, I am still waiting!
Carol, Just a point of information for you…BSE is NOT an Origins word, it is actually the Baby Scoopo Ear Research Initiative (BSERI), and the term EMS was coined because they (BSRTI) had tradmarked the terms BSE and Baby Scoop Era.
I hope that your memory of other events in the past are better than your recollection of this.
Thank you Carol…I proved my point.
You were not just obsessively knawing at that big bone of yours, that you now have totally consumed, you also were chomping at a mighty leather bit, that you have also entirely engulfed. I remarked with just a few sentences to you, you came back with pages upon pages of accusations, lectures and tirades. Which tells me you have been waiting for this moment in heated anticipation. I gave you your in..you took it. Are you happy now, do you have a sense of supreme relief and great self-satisfaction? Well for your sake, I hope you do. Now maybe since you got all your self-justified crap off your chest you can go back to doing your important work in the ‘trenches’ of Nebraska and the internet. And be careful what you accuse others of..personally I don’t have a *selective memory*.
Be well and Peace!
Melisha Mitchell’s daughter is celebrating??
How curious..being I once had a very interesting phone call with MM about her daughter and their reunion. Hmmmmmmm…
Hopefully MM’s daughter will get her OBC.
Back to the subject of criticizing versus doing…ya’ll might be interested to know that the AAC seems to be back in the business of pro-active DOING…
THEY are planning a display booth at the 2010 Legislative Summit, Louisville, Kentucky, July 25 – 28, 2010 with handouts describing the need for adult adoptees to have access to the original birth certificate.
AND…they are also providing training and support so you are comfortable explaining the AAC position and can answer the questions that legislators may raise.
Imagine that! Training people on the issues – educating legislators…DOING instead of criticizing…just imagine.
THIS is what I expected from BN, not sitting back and name-calling.
KUDOS to the AAC…
Sorry to interrupt. Please go back to arguing with one another…far more important than actually creating change through education.
Since the AAC pushes nothing but compromise–name one clean bill they have sponsored and promoted– they don’t support adoptee rights or anybody else’s rights but the adoption industry.
Why do you even are what BN Mirah? You’re not in the trenches you admit. They why try to tell people what they should be doing when you’re not doing it.
You do know, don’t you, that the AAC refused to repudiate the IL bill due to internal disputes, don’t you.
Mirah, I hope you will sign up for the AAC booth in KY. They are looking for volunteers. You can be “in the trenches” too.
So much amusing commentary here, including the fight over trademarking “BSE” (Baby Scoop Era)leading to the equally obscure “Era of Mass Surrenders.” Do you folks have any idea how ridiculous infighting over minutiae like that looks to the outside world who read this blog?
Ladies–Please notch this down!
I posted a comment last evening that didn’t appear. If that was purposeful or perhaps due to some glitch, I’m actually relieved. It was reactive and stooping to the level some of the other posts. I apologize for the disruption – it was just so shocking to have my agreement of Maryanne’s guest blog attacked.
I am weary of this whole imagined war that started obviously because of an intellectual disagreement that I had with this support group’s mission.
I have nothing else to add except to express shock and dismay that women I valued in my life are capable of making comments such as the following.
“Please don’t flatter YOUR self that you are the only mother I have come up against who is angry or has faced a life-threatening illness! Get over yourself!”
Very classy and speaks volumes about anger issues.
But, I would also like to get back to the matter of adoption reform.
Thanks Marley, for allowing the free exchange of different perceptions and opinions. And thank you to Marianne for obviously a thought provoking guest commentary.
Well, back to the trenches of Nebraska!! LOL
Hmm.. I don’t have anything else from you Carol. If something comes in later that looks like it’s late, I’ll not post it. This happens occasionally, and I know I sometimes post to someone else’s blog and it disappears en route.
I sort of find linguistic arguments interesting, but to the outside world they mean nothing. There’s a whole political world out there made up of these fights (not limited to adoption).
Thanks Marley. I appreciate that you won’t post anything else I sent last night in the throes of my fit of indignation.
And yes, I admit it – I am very glad I was able to say some things that others have told me, needed to be said. No more secrets for me!
I find it interesting that even when you and Mirah or others disagree; you are both able to express yourselves on each other’s blogs like civilized people. Slamming people and running is pretty cowardly and usually a tactic used by bullies.
I also thought it pretty cool of you to allow such a heated exchange of darts flying from every direction on your blog. But then again, I know you’re not afraid of confrontation. LOL