Degrees of Openness: A Matter of Choice

Currently 0/5 Stars.

You may use the stars on the left to rate and leave feedback for the current article. No registration is required. Waiting for 5 votes

Please note, this page is no longer being maintained and may contain old or inaccurate information. Visit the home page or select a category in the navigation for more up-to-date information.

Degrees of Openness: A Matter of Choice

by Pat Johnston

My husband and I are participating in three quite different sorts of adoptions (one confidential; one which is open in that there is identification, though there is no communication; and one which is open and involves direct communication on an ongoing basis). We find ALL of these adoptions rewarding. Our children, aged 15, 9 and almost 7 are healthy and happy. The children have adjusted well, and there are healthy and fully developed senses of entitlement built between both parents here and all three children and siblings. Their questions about their adoptions are answered openly and honestly.

The adoption of our now almost 16 year old was a confidential one--not really by choice; it was just that that was the way things were done sixteen years ago. I have made some efforts to open the lines of communication (not because my child is interested, but because I am), but have so far been unsuccessful in getting identifying information on my own. Evidently his birthparents have not made use of the three search and support group registries being run in our state, since I've listed us there and there has been no match. They have not contacted the doctor who delivered our baby and through whom this private adoption was arranged, where a letter awaits them in the file. This may be either because they continue to want confidentiality or because they just don't know that these unofficial registries exist. When our child is eighteen, if he wishes, he can put his name on the official registry in our state. Ours is a mutual consent registry, which means there will be no match unless birthparents want it and that he must have our permission too (which he does already.)

This adoption is going well. We have a well-adjusted child with whom we are open and honest. I am really offended by the inference in nearly all of the literature which promotes open adoption that since his records are sealed and we don't communicate with his birthfamily, there is something dishonest about his adoption. He knows what we know, and he knows that we are willing to help him obtain information if he wants it. Since he also knows that one of the other adoptions is quite open, he knows that we wouldn't be threatened if he did ask for information now, so I have to assume that he really is being honest that he has no needs in this area at this time.

The second adoption is confidential in that we are not in communication, though we offered the option of communication to the birthparents at the time of the adoption and they declined. We do have full names and information about both birthparents. We also have some information about developments in their lives after the adoption. Though we do not know at this time where they live, I think we could find out rather easily through members of their families and/or alumni records at their schools. This adoption, too, is going well. Our daughter is well-adjusted and comfortable with the information that we are able to provide for her, which is really quite a lot.

The third adoption (child is now almost seven) is open. We have ongoing contact with the birthmother (but not the birthfather, who was not available to the birthmother after he discovered she was pregnant.) We write to her directly and exchange pictures (The agency didn't really plan for this option. It was our choice.). Communication is informal, done whenever one or the other feels like it. We don't have visits back and forth, but not because we've ruled the possibility out. This child is the most anxious of our three, though we do not attribute this to the openness of the adoption, but to some attachment problems at the beginning which can be directly blamed on poor agency foster care practice and on some issues related to the fact that our child is racially different from her family (and from her birthmother.)

Frankly, though we continue to feel very good about openness and advocate it as a choice for all involved, we find that in some ways this form of adoption is HARDER for the parents and children than the confidential adoptions are. For one thing, openness in adoption almost NEVER involves a static agreement about the way it will work, as so much of the literature on openness seems to imply. Working out the format and the degree of communication is negotiated over and over as needs of the parties involved change, and this is something that I don't think that most people either birthparents or adopters really realize going in. This has certainly been true for most of the people I know who are experiencing open adoption. In several cases (though clearly not the majority), the initially unrecognized need to be flexible over the years has led to serious communication breakdowns between the parties in the adoption often long after the initial intermediaries/counselors are no longer involved.

As for the children and what information they have, one thing many people forget is that in confidential adoptions there is not the expectation of communication from the birthparents. In the open adoption, on the other hand, when lots of time goes by without our hearing from our birthmother, there is the concern that she's "forgotten" us, when in reality what has happened is that she has gotten swept up in her life with her subsequent marriage and the children born to it and is "getting on" with her life. Though, while I hasten to say that our child is not suffering from feelings of abandonment about this, I feel that situations like these have the potential for setting children up for feelings of abandonment that are just as real and just as painful and even perhaps moreso than for children in confidential adoptions who can at least fantasize that their birthparents may want communication and can't find them to do so.

A frequently tossed out reason to promote open adoption is that it is the only way to prevent children from feeling cut off from their "roots." It does not seem to me that this is a strong enough reason to impose this form of adoption on birthparents or adopters who are not comfortable with this as a personal choice. First, it is important to remember that we are products of both our heredity and our environment. While genetic connections are important, and must be acknowledged as a real potential loss in adoption, we must acknowledge as well the very real impact of environment on the people we become--the schools and houses of worship we attend, the values of our parents and extended families, the books we read, the places we live, etc.

To follow the plants and roots analogy, please remember that plants which are uprooted put down new roots where they are planted. In healthy families, children develop strong attachments not just to their parents and siblings, but to their extended families grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, and close friends as well. When we as adoptive parents feel too guilty that we have cut off our children from their "roots," we insult ourselves and our families and we put up barriers to our children's developing a sense of entitlement to us and to our extended families!

My husband, an adult who was adopted as an infant, very much sees himself as the descendant of the parents who adopted him. The family myths and heirlooms are his, and, as an adoptee with a healthy sense of entitlement of his own, he acknowledges that while he doesn't share Rohrer/Johnston genes (and respects and values the genes of his birthfamily which made him tall, slim, smart, quiet, etc.), he is most definitely the child of the Johnston/ Rohrer family's culture, values, etc.

Open adoption most certainly is the wave of the 1990's. What disturbs me, though, is the number of prospective adopters and birthparents, too, who are now being pressured into this choice in much the same way that people were once pressured into confidential adoption. When it comes to confidential vs open adoption, I remain pretty much in the center. The issue here is one of empowerment. Rather than allowing institutions--from legislatures to agencies--to make these decisions for us, we as adults deserve to make our own well- informed choices. I believe that there is and should be room for the parties in an adoption--birthparents and prospective adopters--to negotiate their own needs, which will no doubt include an almost infinite spectrum from total confidentiality to shared parenting agreements which are similar to the situations of families of divorce.

Unless choices are freely made, we cannot own them. When we do not own our choices, our losses become unresolved. When we are suffering with unresolved losses, the real victims are the children for whom an adoption plan has been made. I encourage everyone who cares about adoption to keep their minds and their options open!

Pat wrote this article in 1991 and reports that all three adoptions are continuing as reported above except that they have added communication with the birthfather of their third child. Pat Johnston is an infertility and adoption educator who has provided training on these issues for both consumers and professionals throughout the US and Canada. The publisher at Perspectives Press, she has authored several books. You may reach her at Perspectives Press,P.O. Box 90318, Indianapolis, IN 46290.

Want to Adopt? Pregnant? Free Services click here