The Myth Series: Killer Adoptees

Actually ACS to me sounds like a mistaken diagnosis. In actuality the symptoms of ACS are basically identical to FASD (Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders). It's been recently realized that a very high percentage of adopted children do have some degree of Fetal Alcohol effective damage, which manifests itself in various behavioral problems and many FASD victims end up in and out of the prison system for life. This is not just true for children adopted from Russia but from the USA as well. I have a 16 year old son who was alcohol exposed in utero. He has had loads of behavior/attachement problems since day 1.
Why are adopted children more at risk for exposure to alcohol in utero? Because many times, the birthmother is either a teenager just starting to experiment with sex/drugs/alcohol and doesn't know any better, or the baby is born to an addictive older woman who is not in any position to raise the child. I'm not saying all adopted children are alcohol exposed but they have a much high percentage of exposure than non-adopted children.
I recently spoke with a detective from our local police dept. about some trouble my son had gotten into, he told me that around 80% of the juvenile repeat offenders he's seen are Fetal Alcohol Effected. Quite eye opening!

Posted by: KMM at 06/21/2006 07:30 PM

I think this is a fascinating area and I was very interested to read these posts.
I am currently researching a documentary about attachment and would be very interested to hear any cases in law where ACS has been used as a defence. I would be very grateful for your help!

Posted by: Juliet S at 04/12/2006 06:33 AM

I would love to see these studies expanded upon, because it's my guess that there is plenty of missing information. If the killing adoptees in question were born in a time (which wasn't that long ago, and not all countries and states have even caught up now!) where requirements on disclosure of birth parent information were different, I would imagine there may have been a lot of cases where the adoptive families were not privvy to information about mental health issues that ran in the birth family or other things that would lend themselves to behavior problems and in the worst cases, sociopathy. I realize mental health is still a relatively new science in many ways (in many cases, experts still do not know why exactly certain drugs work to help alleviate symptoms of serious diseases such as bi-polar disorder and schitzophrenia and we only assume some of these things are genetic based on a limited history), so this adds to the difficulty of determining exactly what is behind deviant or violent behavior. And I would imagine there's also the chance that we as a society are scrutinizing groups that are considered not part of a "normal" family structure such as adoptees (which actually, "normal" is a ridiculous definition because families come in all shapes and sizes these days) closer than other groups as we search for answers to why people do horrific things.

I agree that the creation of "ACS" feels like another one of those terms that gives the excuse to medicate. I believe in the value of medication, but putting a label on being adopted as a "syndrome" seems pretty bleak to me, and not accurate. You are not born adopted, and I certainly see it as a medical condition. Whatever "syndrome" has developed is the result of the challenges of adoption is more likely a combination of a child not having enough opportunity to explore and try to understand his/her adoption and how it contributes to the person he/she is and/or some other emotional disorder that causes his/her brain to function differently that, while it is not related to adoption per se, was probably exacerbated by the difficulties of dealiing with it. And obviously, not all adopted people have resentment so deep and strong that it causes them to be socially unproductive, or, even worse, murderous animals.

This article was definitely an interesting look at social "mis"-constructions though! Again, I'd like to see more details on those adoptees involved in their research.

Posted by: avalanche at 10/28/2005 08:29 AM

I think as with any other life-changing event that someone would experience as a child, adoption affects adoptees on a core level, but I really believe it's part of the parenting job to help children make sense of this event and help them work through their feelings, both negative, positive and confusing to arrive at a place where they are able to identify who they are. There are certainly chemical imbalances, emotional illnesses and other issues that most certainly would play into the mind of a violent criminal, and I would think that being adopted and the feelings surrounding it would be less of a cause for behavior and more an event that is difficult for a mentally ill person to process without appropriate help. I realize that for adoptees processing who they are can be very difficult, particularly in cases where first parents are lost for whatever reason and they cannot locate information to fill in that missing puzzle piece. But with appropriate guidance from parents and those they seek for support, I would imagine something could be done, challenges could be handled or at least illnesses and other things that might contribute to violent behavior. Rarely (I would say never, but I'm not a professional by any means!) is being adopted THE main cause of the problem; there are countless other societal and family factors that play into the actions of individuals, and it's impossible to place blame on one person or event in the violent individual's life.

I find it interesting how quickly we as a society have become to label every state of mind, physical being, etc. as its own special syndrome, and I think it is a way to "label" something instead of investigating what it truly is and getting to the root of the ailment or problem. They have even started labeling the feeliing of not being able to keep still when you're trying to sleep at night (which often happens if you exercise too much or stand too much or have too much muscle activity during the day) "Restless Leg Syndrome," and have medication for it. When are we going to stop immediately medicating or labeling and start actually talking and investigating?

Posted by: bandstand at 10/26/2005 08:18 AM